RAVI SALASKAR PROPRIETOR Vs. KIRIT SHAH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these First Appeals, under section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), a Real Estate Developer, the sole Opposite Party in the Complaints under the Act, calls in question the correctness and legality of a common order dated 21.07.2016, passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (for short "the State Commission") in Complaint Cases No. CC/03/223 and CC/03/224. By the impugned order, while holding that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Appellant herein in not completing the construction work as also not obtaining the Occupation Certificate from the Bombay Municipal Corporation (B.M.C.) in respect of the flats in question, the State Commission has partly allowed the Appeals, preferred by the Respondents/Complainants, inter alia, directing the Appellant to complete the incomplete work of the building 'Philipa', as per the specifications mentioned in the agreements executed in favour of the Complainants; take requisite steps to obtain Occupation Certificate to form Cooperative Housing Society of the flat purchasers and get the same registered; and execute conveyance deed in favour of Cooperative Housing Society, within a period of three months form the date of the said order, with a default stipulation of payment of 3,000/- per day till compliance of the order. Further, while Complainants No. 2, 4 and 5 in Complaint Case No. CC/03/223 were directed to pay to the Appellant the balance consideration of 3,60,000/- and 50,000/- and 2,50,000/- respectively, the Appellant was directed to pay to the Complainants in both the Complaints collectively 5,00,000/- and 50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and litigation costs respectively.

(2.) Since both the Complaints involve more or less similar facts, same Opposite Party, common issues and have been disposed of by the State Commission by a common order, these Appeals, filed against the said order, are also being disposed of by this common order.

(3.) The circumstances, necessitating filing of the Complaint, as culled out from the impugned order, are as under: