State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Runwal Pearl Coral Co-Operative ... vs Runwal Constructions & 2 Ors. on 13 November, 2025
'1
IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
NEW DELHI
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 35 OF 2016
Runwal Pearl Coral Co-operative Housing Society Limited,
Runwal Pearl, Opp. Godrej Lawkim,
Chitalsar, Manpada,
Ghodbunder Road, Thane (W)-400 607,
Maharashtra State. ... Complainant
Versus
1. Runwal Constructions,
Runwal and Omkar Esquare,
5th Floor, Sion (East),
Mumbai-400 022,
Maharashtra State.
2. Mr. S.S. Runwal,
Partner, Runwal Construtions,
Runwal and Omkar Esquare,
5th Floor, Sion (East),
Mumbai-400 022,
Maharashtra State.
3. Mrs. Charu Pataki,
Partner, Runwal Construtions,
Runwal and Omkar Esquare,
5th Floor, Sion (East),
Mumbai-400 022,
Maharashtra State. .... Opp. Parties
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.P. SAHI, PRESIDENT
IHON'BLE MR. BHARATKUMAR PANDYA, MEMBER
For the Complainant Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Advocate
Mr. Asav Rajan, Advocate
Mr. Mayank Biyani, Advocate
Ms. Charu Trivedi, Advocate
Mr. Devang Shrotriya, Advocate
Mr. Kashish Chadha, Advocate
For the Opp. Parties Ms. Malvika Kapila Kalra, Advocate
Ms. Tanwangi Shukla, Advocate
CC No.35 of 2016 1
RESERVED ON : 18.12.2024
PRONOUNCED ON : 13.11.2025
ORDER
JUSTICE A.P. SAHI, PRESIDENT
1. This Complaint has been filed by a Cooperative Housing Society alleging deficiencies against the developer/builder/Ops for having charged excess amount and at the same time, there being a shortfall in the carpet area as promised under the agreements to the buyers and other deficiencies that have been enlisted in the prayer clause which needs to be extracted at the outset:
"a) Order and direct the Opposite Parties to refund of the excess amounts aggregating to around Rs.4,76,23,600/- (Rupees four crores seventy six lakhs twenty three thousand and six hundred and twenty only) illegally collected from each of the Purchasers in respect of the deficit carpet area along with 21 % interest;
b) Order and direct the Opposite Parties to make installation of the third lift/elevator or to refund of cost of installation of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees forty lakhs) with 21 % interest,
c) Order and direct the Opposite Parties to refund of car parking charges aggregating to around Rs. 5,50,000/- (Rupees five lakhs fifty thousand only) collected illegally from the residents/members of the Complainant Society with 21% interest;
d) Order and direct the Opposite Parties to make payment of Maintenance charges to society towards unsold flats, sales office, sample flat etc. from the date of obtaining occupation certificate amounting to Rs.16,50,000/-
(Rupees Sixteen lakhs fifty thousand only); and
e) Order and direct the Opposite Parties to make payment of interest @ 9% p.a for delay in the commissioning of club house from the stipulated date of possession as promised in Agreement for Sale as per the relevant clause aggregating to around Rs. 15,83,439/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs eighty three thousand four hundred and thirty nine only); and
f) Order and direct the opposite Parties to refund the Club Membership fees collected aggregating to Rs. 87,96,887/-(Rupees eighty seven lakhs ninety six thousand eight hundred and eighty seven) along with 21% interest, and CC No.35 of 2016 2
g) Order and direct the Opposite Parties to handover the audited accounts and other related documents including structural certificate;
h) Order and direct the Opposite Parties to make ensure that valid Fire NOC is obtained from the relevant authorities and the fire and safety systems are functional;"
2. The project was termed as 'Runwal Pearl' and the dispute in the present case centers and is confined to Tower-B of the said project. The said tower is a building comprising of a ground floor + 20 floors that accommodates a total of 80 flats out of which, 40 of the flats are 2.5 BHK and the rest of the 40 flats are 3 BHK.
3. According to the Complainants, the advertisements were made and agreements were entered into. Sample agreements of both types of flats have been filed as Annexure-4 and Annexure-5 to the Complaint respectively. According to the Complaint, the carpet area mentioned in the 3 BHK flats is 935 sq. ft. whereas in the 2.5 BHK Flats, the area mentioned is 825 sq. ft. Clause-14 in both the agreements referred to the said respective areas in relation to each of these two categories of flats. The occupancy certificate was issued by the Thane Municipal Corporation on 30.11.2012 whereafter, the delivery of possession commenced. According to the Complainants, they put their signatures on the letters of delivery of possession without verifying the same and since they were in need of their flats, they were virtually compelled to receive the possession by signing on the letters.
4. The Complainant society was registered on 17.10.2014 and the administration of the building was handed over to the society on 01.01.2015. It is alleged by the Complainants that the Annual General CC No.35 of 2016 3 1'i Meeting had been held on 28.12.2014 where deficiencies on the part of the OPs were deliberated upon. According to the Complainants, the deficiencies related to the discrepancy in the carpet area, the third lift not having been provided for, parking charges collected illegally, payment regarding maintenance of all unsold flats having been realised, delay in the commissioning of club house and some other deficiencies. The Complainants claim refund of the said amount. It is also alleged that the accounts that were to be maintained in respect of maintenance and the documents, have not been handed over to the society which is a violation of the provisions of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963.
5. It is also alleged that the fire fighting system of the building has not been handed over and the No Objection Certificate had lapsed for which no steps have been taken. With all these deficiencies and unfair trade practices, the Complaint was filed.
6. \Ne may point out that the OPs/developer/builder moved IA/2485/2017 challenging the maintainability of the Complaint on behalf of the society and had also moved an application for condoning the delay in filing the written statement. All these interim applications and the replies in relation thereto, were taken up and disposed of through various orders. The order passed on 26.09.2018 is extracted herein under:
"IA/407/2016 is an application on behalf of the complainant seeking condonation of delay, if any. As per report of the Registry, there is no delay. This IA is therefore dismissed as infructuous.
IA/17108/2017 is an application seeking condonation of delay of 69 days in filing of written statement by the opposite parties. After some arguments, counsel for the complainant has no objection to condonation of delay, subject to imposition of cost. Accordingly, delay is condoned, subject to the opposite parties remitting a sum of Rs.20,000/- by means of demand draft to the complainant society, within four weeks.CC No.35 of 2016 4
IA/5448/2018 is an application for condonation of delay by the complainant in filing their reply to IA/17108/2017 filed by the opposite parties for condonation of delay. As delay has been condoned, this application has become infructuous.
IA/2485/2017 and IA/2484/2017 are applications filed on behalf of the opposite parties challenging the maintainability of this complaint under Section 12 (1) (b)/12 (1) (c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Reply to these applications has been filed on behalf of the complainant.
Heard. Since two primary conditions for maintainability of complaint as laid down in the judgment of Larger Bench of this Commission in the matter of Moulivakkam Trust Heights Flats Affected Buyers Association vs. M/s Prime Sristi Housing Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. [CC/560/2014 decided on 5.5.2017/ viz; that a society should be registered under a relevant law and it should have a memorandum of association which should permit it to file consumer cases, are satisfied, we hold that this consumer complaint is maintainable on behalf of the society.
As far as pleadings in this case are concerned, reply has been filed on behalf of the opposite parties, rejoinder and affidavit by way of evidence has also been filed on behalf of the complainant. Opposite parties may now file their affidavit by way of evidence within six weeks.
List for final hearing on 9.7.2019. "
7. During the pendency of the Complaint, IA/13604/2019 has been moved for placing additional documents on record. An order was passed on 15.02.2022 that the application shall be considered on the date of final hearing. The order dated 15.02.2022 is extracted herein under:
''Let Evidence by way of Affidavit be filed by the Opposite Party within four weeks.
List for Final Hearing on 22.06.2022 before the Appropriate Bench as per Roster. All pending Applications shall be considered on that date. In the meantime, learned Counsel for the Parties may file the Written Submissions after exchanging the same with each other. "
8. The said application was allowed on 06.03.2023 by the following order:
"IA No. 13604 of 2019 has been filed by the OP for placing additional documents. IA is allowed. Additional documents are taken on record.CC No.35 of 2016 5
List on 15.5.2023 for final hearing. In the meantime, both parties to file short synopsis of written arguments, atleast two weeks before the next date. "
Consequently, the additional documents have been accepted on record and the case thereafter, was taken up on 08.05.2024 when the following order was passed:
"Heard learned counsel for the complainant.
This is a builder buyer dispute where discrepancies and deficiencies have been alleged in respect whereof the learned counsel has invited the attention of the Bench to the prayer clause (a) to (h) of the complainant. It is urged that these deficiencies continue to persist. The arguments commenced with the alleged deficiency with regard to the deficit in carpet area. The contention is in respect of 3 BHK and 2.5 BHK flat in Tower B. The said deficiency was located after possession was handed over, which according to the complainant was taken under compulsion or compulsive circumstances as alleged in paragraph 9 of the complaint. To support this submission, learned counsel has invited the attention of the Bench to the Panchnama said to be a measurement carried out on 26.05.2015 (annexure 11 Page 178). According to the said panchnama, the deficiencies stand established as there is a clear recital that the developer has committed breach of Section 11 of the Meteorology Act, 2009.
The approximate shortage indicated by the complainant in 3 BHK flats is 64.23 sq. ft. and in 2.5 BHK flats is about 57.56 sq. ft. For this, learned counsel also pleaded that the possession, was taken under compulsion without actual measurement, the shortage gets corroborated by the acts of the opposite party, who included clause 18 in the possession letter dated 16.02.2013. Not only this they had apprehended this issue and therefore letters were obtained from the members of the society and one said letter has been filed by the opposite party in their reply dated 13.02.2012 (annexure R-3), said to have been signed by Mr. Prakash Ras Pyale. The arguments could not conclude today.
Let the same continue on 17.10.2024 at 2 p.m. Learned counsel for the complainant may submit his written submissions before the Registry within a week. "
Accordingly, the matter was finally heard on 18.12.2024 and the orders were reserved.
9. Additional documents that have been accepted on record and the documents filed alongwith the written statement of the OPs have therefore, to be taken in to consideration while appreciating the CC No.35 of 2016 6 arguments that have been advanced on behalf of the Complainants and is noted in the orders passed earlier as well as the responses thereof to this effect by the OPs. In response to the allegations made in the Complaint, regarding the deficiencies enlisted hereinabove, the OPs have come out with a case that so far as the carpet area is concerned, the same was measured and appropriately clarified and such a clarification issued to one of the occupants Mr. Prakash Raspayle on 13.02.2012 has been acknowledged though it is as per the approved plan and that the occupant had no grievance regarding the same. The said letter is extracted herein under:
"From: Prakash Raspayle 201 Gandharva Apartment Rambaug Lane 4 Kalyan(w) Dist.
Date: 13/02/2012 To, Runwal constructions Runwal Pearl Project Thane.
Subject: Carpet area clarification.
The area of my flat is checked on 11/2/12. It is as per approved municipal plan. Now I do not have any Issues about carpet area.
So kindly arrange to Hand over the possession of my flat at the earliest. I have already made total payment including other charges.
Thanking You Prakash Raspayle"
10. The second document on which reliance has been placed on behalf of the OPs are the affidavits that have been tendered by the occupants while taking possession. Affidavit given by Mr. Raspayle on 14.02.2012 is extracted herein under:
"1. I/We say that l/We have booked a Flat/Unit No. 501 on B TOWER in building known as "RUNWAL PEARL Situated at Ghodbunder Road, Manpada, Thane 400 607 (Hereinafter referred to as the said CC No.35 of 2016 7 Flat/premises) for the price and upon the terms and conditions as mentioned in the Agreement for Sale dated 18TH AUGUST, 2009 which has been duly registered with the office of Sub-Registrar Mumbai.
2. I/We say that I/We have paid the full and final consideration and various other deposits & charges to RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS as mentioned in the Agreement for Sale dated 18TH AUGUST, 2009.
3. I/We say that l/We have inspected/visited personally the said building including the said flat which "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS has constructed and the building & Flat /Shop is as per the plans approved/sanctioned by Thane Municipal Corporation and other concerned authorities.
4. I/We say that the construction of the building where my/our flat is situated is already completed up to 20 floor and all the necessary & basic amenities/facilities have already been provided in the building and in the said flat. I/We have personally visited and inspected the said flat and l/we are totally and fully satisfied with the construction quality of the said building and Flat together with amenities/facilities provided in the said flat.
5. I/We say that I/We have inspected the said flat and are happy with the construction of the said building and flat together with amenities/facilities as/provided therein. I/We hereby confirm and place on record that at no time in future hereafter, I/We shall not raise any objection and/or make any claim of any nature about the construction work and amenities/facilities in the said building & Flat at my/our request the "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS", has allowed me/us to carry out the furniture work in the said flat entire at my/our own risk, cost and consequences and at no point of time "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS™ shall be held liable or responsible for anything whatsoever including any accident or incidents take place.
6. I/We say that l/we are in urgent need of flat/ premises to accommodate my family therefore I requested 'RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS to allow and permit me/us to carry out the furniture work in the said flat to enable me to occupy the said flat upon receipt of occupation certificate from Thane Municipal Corporation and possession CONSTRUCTIONS letter from "RUNWAL.
7. // We further state, confirm and declare that since, the delay in handing over possession of the said flat was for the reason beyond the control of "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS" and which they have informed us and we have acknowledged and consented for the same, in view the same, we hereby once again declare and place on record that there is no reason for me/us claiming or demanding any interest, fine or penalty or damages for delay in handing over the possession of the said flat or otherwise and however, if at all there is anything, we hereby unconditionally, irrevocably and vehemently, willingly, freely without any coercion/ CC No.35 of 2016 8 pressure waive off all the such claim or demand in toto from "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS" due to delay in handover of the said flat/ unit.
8. I/We say that at my/our request "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS" was pleased to allow and permit us to carry out the furniture work in the flat entirely at our cost and risk vide their letter dated 13/02/2012.
9. l/we further say, declare undertake and reiterate that neither I will stay, reside or use the said flat for residence/commercial purposes or otherwise, nori will let, sublet, underlet, transfer / sell /assign /license or lease etc, or give any authority or power to any third party without prior written NOC / consent of the "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS" until the occupation certificate is received from BMC and or l/we receive the possession letter from "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS".
10. l/we say that l/we will carryout the furniture work in the said flat strictly on the terms and conditions as mentioned in the letter dated issued by "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS Further, I shall observe and perform all rules and regulation of local body. BMC and/or other concerned authorities and shall also observe and perform all the directions / instructions of "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS from time to time in compliance until with such rules and as per our Agreement for sale.
11.1 say that I shall not use/occupy the aforesaid flat unless, l/We obtain possession letter from "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS".
12. I/We say that during the period of furniture work, in case you suffer any loss, cost, damages or expenses of any nature due to any of our acts/deeds, l/we shall indemnify and keep indemnified you from time to time and at all a time in future for such loss, cost & expenses etc.
13. VWe say that l/we will sign and execute any other documents, deed and papers and writing if any required in future related to the said flat as long as it does not adversely affect my four rights under the said Agreement for sale.
14. Notwithstanding anything contained under this Affidavit cum undertaking and declaration, 1/ We have expressly agreed, accepted and confirmed to pay / reimburse to the "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS"
immediately as and when demanded by the "RUNWAL CONSTRUCTIONS", and/or to the appropriate authorities all the present/ future / revised / new property /MAR Municipal Tax, Service Tax, Surcharges, Education cess, Vat -Tax, W. C. T. Tax, and / or any other levies, taxes, cess, dues EVENT terminology payable and / or may become payable due to duties etc., which may be called or demanded under any name or change / amendment in the existing Laws, Rules or due to implementation / enactment of any new laws / rules by the Local bodies, State Government, Central Government or by any other competent CC No.35 of 2016 9 authorities. l/We shall pay such amount in additions to any amount mentioned under the agreement or otherwise.
15. l/We say that l/We shall park our Car vehicles in the allotted place only and not otherwise.
16. This affidavit cum undertaking and declaration shall be binding on me/us and on my/our legal heirs / nominee or assignee.
l/We once again reiterate and declare that whatever is stated hereinabove is true to the best of my/our knowledge and belief.
Solemnly affirmed on this 14th day of Feb 2012 at Mumbai."
A similar undertaking by Ms. Deepa Mahadev Patil which is to a similar effect dated 11.02.2013, is extracted herein under:
"AFFIDAVIT CUM UNDERTAKING & DECLARATION l/We MS. DEEPA MAHADEO PATIL aged about 36 years Indian Inhabitant presently residing/having address at A-7, AMEYA CO. OP. HSG. SOCIETY, PIPE LINE ROAD, NEW TILAK NAGAR, CHEMBUR, MUMBAI- 400 089.
l/We say that l/We have purchased a flat No.704 Tower No.B (CORAL).on rare floor in building known as "RUNWAL PEARL situated at Chitalsar Manpadi Ghodbunder Road, Thane (W) (hereinafter referred to as the said Flat) for the consideration and upon the terms and conditions as mentioned in the Agreement fog Sale dated 12th September 2002 which has been duly registered with the office of Sub-Registrar of Assurance at THANE (said Agreement) executed between ourselves and Runwal Constructions.
1. I/We say that under the said Agreement, l/We have already paid the full and final consideration including all the deposits, & interest etc. and nothing outstanding or due to be paid by me/me/us to Runwal Constructions.
2. IA/Ve say that under the terms of the said Agreement, the possession date was mentioned as 31.05.2011 but the same was delayed due to the beyond control of Runwal Constructions as they have intimated to me/us from time to time.
3. l/We say that after execution of said Agreement, some differences/disputes arose between me/us on the issue of delay possession and/or on point of interest etc. and accordingly, l/We have addressed/sent my/our grievances to Runwal Constructions by letters/emails.
4. lA/Ve say that thereafter, l/We have personally met with the concerned officer of Runwal Constructions, who has explained me/us the situation and CCNo.35of 2016 10 the reason for delay in handing over possession of the said flat to our satisfaction. l/We therefore hereby declare, confirm and place on record that all our disputes and differences have been amicably resolved/ settled to our satisfaction and l/We have no claim, demand of any nature over the delay in handing over the possession of the said flat or claiming any interest etc. from Runwal Constructions or otherwise and l/We hereby value all our claim of demand if any.
5. l/We say that vide letter dated 11/2/2013 Runwal Constructions have informed me/us that they have obtained occupation certification (OC) from Thane Municipal Corporation and said flat is ready for occupation.
6. l/We say that l/We have checked and physically inspected sold building including the said flat and have verified the carpet area of the said flat and the same has been constructed as per the plans approved/sanctioned by Thane Municipal Corporation and other concerned authorities and/or as mentioned in the said Agreement.
7. l/We say that the construction of the said building where our flat is situated is already completed and all the amenities/facilities have already been provided in the building and in the said flat as mentioned in the said Agreement, l/We have personally visited and inspected the said flat including the carpet area of the flat and l/We are totally and fully satisfied with the construction quality of the said building and flat together with amenities/facilities provided in the said flat.
8. I/We say that l/We have inspected the said flat and are happy with the construction of the sold building and flat together with amenities/facilities as/provided therein. l/We hereby confirm and place on record that at no time In future hereafter, l/We shall raise any objection and/or make any claim of any nature about the construction work and amenities/facilities in the said building & flat.
9. l/We further state, record and confirm that l/We have no complaints/grievances, demand or claim of any nature including demand or claim of any Interest due to delay in handing ever possession of the said flat and our complaint and/or grievances have been amicably resolved and settled at our satisfaction and in view of the amicable settlement, l/We hereby unconditionally withdraw all our claims, allegations, objections made against you and accordingly all our allegations/communications and/or complaints oral/written stand withdrawn unconditionally and l/We have no grievances or claim of any nature against Runwal Constructions, or Directors or employees.
10. VWe say and declare and confirm that l/We have not filed and shall not file hereafter any complaint, disputes, objection or application before any authority, forum or tribunal and against Runwal Constructions or its officers.
CC No.35 of 2016 1111. \/We further declare and undertake to sign, execute and register all the deeds, writing or documents etc. as may be required by the Runwal Constructions at any time hereafter.
12.1/We say that l/We are taking possession of the said flat without any coercion, with our free will after fully satisfying ourselves. I/We declare that I/We shall not raise any complaint/ dispute of whatsoever nature against Runwal Constructions or its officers.
13. This affidavit cum undertaking and declaration will be binding on me/us and on our legal heirs/nominee or assignee.
I/We hereby once again reiterate, confirm and declare that whatever is stated hereinabove is true to the best of my/our knowledge and belief. "
The Complainant society had sought clarifications regarding the deficiencies alleged to which, a reply was filed by the OPs on 09.12.2014. The same is extracted herein under:
"Dated: 09 December 2014 The Chairman/Secretary, Runwal Pearl Tower-B (Coral) CHS Ltd., Behind R-Mall, Ghodbunder Road, Thane.
Please refer to your email and subsequent communications of date: 14th November 2014 Point wise reply to your quires is mentioned below:
Demarcation of car parking-List of car park allotted-A list of car parks allotted in respect of the residents of Coral tower, (Building B) will be shared with you along with the rest of the society formation papers. The visitor's car park will be earmarked once the development of the entire complex is completed.
Permission of 3rd lift in the tower- As per discussion it was clarified that the two lifts meet the necessary requirement and are sufficient as per the required norms.
Property Tax-Property tax payment details have been shared in separate communication.
Indemnify notification from M/S. Runwal Constructions regarding statutory payment- The Company has made all the payment where ever we have received the bills and the collection received from the customers.CC No.35 of 2016 12
Interest on Delayed possession of the club house & swimming pool- The amenities are developed in phases and may not get ready by the time possession is given. The developments of amenities require inputs from various consultants and the architects. More over the charges collected at the time of possession are for life time membership and not for maintenance of the club house. In view of the explanation mentioned above your request for interest cannot be entertained.
Discrepancy in carpet area - There is no discrepancy in the carpet area. We have already addressed the same vide our letter dated-14 October 2014 Planning of sufficient water supply - with regards to the water connection we have been informed by the TMC authority that the current connection is enough for the building requirement hence we are unable to take any further TAP connection.
Rectification of seepages of flat- The facilities and project team placed at site have already started working on the seepage issue, a part of work is balance which is being done by the projects.
Water proofing and anti-termite treatment Guarantee - The same will be handed over in due course of time.
Undertaking by the builder regarding defect liability & limitation of liability of the society - Has already been covered in individual agreement for sale.
Demarcation of land area conveyed to the society - This will be discussed separately with our legal team post-handover of society formation formalities.
Completion of fire fighting system-The rectification of fire fighting has already been undertaken and we awaiting the confirmation from the members of the society to conduct the demonstration. Miscellaneous component is under procurement will be installed by 15th December 2014.
Provision of sufficient equipment in the club house - Equipments of club house and other amenities are planned on basis of project profile as envisaged by the builder in the entire complex. As per consultant the equipment is sufficient for the customer in the pearl premises.
TMC approval for building completion plan, plumbing, drainage and fire fighting plan - The same will be handed over in due course once the society takes the handover.
External painting to repair patches of building and basement area - Painting will be done in due course of time as the same is in process.CC No.35 of 2016 13
Guarantee / Warranties for DG Set, pumping system, solar panel, rain water harvesting & swimming pool system - The equipment which is meant for Tower & guarantees will be handed over to the society. Equipment which is common for the complex, the required papers will be handed over to the Apex/federation whenever formed.
Duration wise all maintenance amount received, flat wise and from which date maintenance started - Account statement of maintenance will be shared with you shortly.
Separate feeder cable - We have already received the necessary approval from the concern authority and have initiated the process of the same. We are expecting to complete the work by January 15th 2015."
11. Apart from this, through the additional documents filed, the OPs have brought on record the Complaint dated 23.12.2015 filed by the Inspector of Legal Metrology Department against the OPs being Complaint No.7961/2015. The said Complaint was a statutory Complaint under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 read with the 2011 Rules and the Enforcement Rules of 2011. The said Complaint was registered before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane and the concerned Court issued notices against the OPs on 10.06.2016 proposing to take action in terms of Section-11 and Section-30 read with Section-29 of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009. The Complaint was with regard to the allegations about the shortage in the carpet areas. The notice dated 10.06.2016 is on record. It was stated by the Inspector who had lodged the Complaint, that the accused have paid the compounding fee of Rs.2,000/-.
12. On 17th June, the Deputy Collector of Legal Metrology Department, informed the Inspector that there was no violation of Section-30 and therefore, the matter is disposed of. The concerned Court before which, the Complaint was pending, passed orders on 18.07.2016 disposing of the matter in terms of the Exhibit before it.
13. The fact of an undertaking having been tendered accepting the measurement of the carpet area is also evident from the letter dated CC No.35 of 2016 14 16.02.2013 filed alongwith the Complaint as Annexure A-8. The said letter was sent by the OPs which was duly acknowledged and counter signed by the said flat owners namely Sanjeev Kumar Singh and Madhu Singh confirming that the carpet area of the flat is the same as per the area mentioned in the agreement.
14. There is a panchnama filed alongwith the Complaint regarding, the deficiency in the total area of the flat that was prepared on 25.06.2015 and is Annexure-11 on page no. 178 of the paper-book. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel or the Complainant that in the said panchnama, reference to the measurement indicates a breach of Section-11 of the Statute Measurement Act, 2009. This allegation was also made by the society in its letter dated 12.08.2015 addressed to the Inspector of Legal Metrology Department on the basis whereof, the proceedings had been initiated.
15. In relation to the shortage of the third lift, the OPs came up with a case that the third lift is not required keeping in view the norms as settled by the National Building Construction Corporation and accordingly, a certificate has been issued by the Architect to that effect on 09.06.2016, the said certificate is extracted herein under:
"TO WHOMSOE VER IT MAY CONCERN This is to certify that, the residential project Runwal Pearl" constructed on Plot Bearing Survey No. 21/B1 & 21/B2 at Chitalsar Manpada, Thane is approved by Thane Municipal Corporation, Thane. The Lilis provided in the project are as per National Building Code which is followed by Thane Municipal Corporation for development. For building of 20 floors, 2 lifts of 10person's capacity are adequate.
For, (ULHAS G. PRADHAN) ARCHITECT TOWER B CC No.35 of 2016 15 No. of lifts requiredfor building determinedfrom National Building Code:-
To determine the handling capacity for lift as per National Building Code Part VIII Building Service. Section 5 Installation of lift and Escalator Design Consideration (Page 15) Handling Capacity is calculated by follow ingformula H 300x Ox 100 (TxP) When H = Handling capacity as the percentage of the peak Population handled during 5 min period.
Q= Average number ofpassengers carried in a car
T= Waiting interval in seconds
P- = Total population to be handled during peak morning period.
During peak morning period value of Q is taken as 80% of the maximum capacity of the car since the car is not located to its maximum capacity during each trip.
A) Size of the lift = 3.00 M. X1.80 M. Speed of lift = 2.50 M. /Second Therefore Qfor 12 persons lifts is 80% i.e. 9.6 persons. Value ofT is calculated by followingformula -
T= (Rtt),
N
Where Rtt = Round trip time
= Total height of building = 65.20 = 26.08 Seconds Speed of lift 2.50 Therefore for round trip maximum seconds will be other 26.08 seconds (say 30 seconds) and other 30 seconds for passengers to get out from the lift and lift stopping at various floor etc. N = Number of lift =1 Therefore T = 60 = 60 Seconds 1 No. offlats 80 No. ofperson/flat 5 Nos.
No. ofperson/bldg. 80 x 5 Nos. = 400 P 400 Now H 300 x 9.6 x 100 288000.00 = 12 60x400 24000.00 CC No.35 of 2016 16 B) Size of the lift = 2.60 M. X 1.80 M. Speed oflift = 2.50 M./Second
Therefore Qfor 10 persons lifts is 80% i.e. 8 persons. Value ofT is calculated by followingformula-
T = (Rtt, N Where Rtt = Round trip time assuming as 200 seconds on safer side.
= Total height of building, = 65.20 = 26.08 Seconds Speed of lift 2.50 Therefore for round trip maximum seconds will be other 26.08 seconds (say 30 seconds) and other 30 seconds for passengers to get out from the lift and lift stopping at various floor etc. N = Number of lift = 1 Therefore T = 60 = 60 Seconds 1 No.offlats 80 No. ofperson/flat 5 nos.
No. ofperson/bldg. 80x5Nos.= 400
P 400
Now H = 300x8x100 = 240000.00 = 10
60x400 24000.00
Total (A+B)= (12 +10) = 22
Hence as per National Building code the 'H' for residential building shall be minimum 7.5. The above figure for building is more than required.
Hence as per National Building Code 2 lifts are sufficient for the above said building. "
It is therefore, urged on behalf of the OPs that there is no deficiency and that the possession has been taken over by all the flat buyers having been inspected the premises and tendering their evidence samples whereof, have been brought on record. It is therefore, urged that there is no shortage of any area nor is there any deficiency and hence, the Complaint deserves to be dismissed.CC No.35 of 2016 17
16. It is urged on behalf of the OPs that the parking area has also been clearly demarcated and the allegations regarding the same are unfounded. Hence, the Complaint deserves to be dismissed.
17. The Complainant has filed a short synopsis which is extracted herein under:
"1. The present Synopsis is being filed on behalf of Runwal Pearl Coral Co- Operative Housing Society Limited ("Complainant") in compliance of directions of this Hon'ble Commission vide order dated 15.05.2023. The captioned consumer complaint has been filed owing to the unfair trade practices and deficiency in services of Runwal Constructions and its Partners ("Opposite Parties") causing a loss amounting to INR 6,42,03,926 to the members of the Complainant society.
2. That briefly put, in 2009, the purchasers came across several promising advertisements published by the Opposite Parties (Ann. A/3, Pg. 28 of Complaint) claiming to be providing flats with top quality modem facilities. In lieu of the same, several purchasers entered into Agreement of Sale for flats in Tower B situated at Village Chitlsar Manpada, Taluka Thane, Maharashtra (Ann. A/4 & 5, Pg. 4 of Complaint). On 30.11.2012, the Opposite Parties received occupancy certificate (Ann. AJ7, Pg. 145 of Complaint) and thereafter began to handover flats to the purchasers (Ann. A/8, Pg. 150 of Complaint) subject to the condition that they issue a letter waiving right of any future claim arising from dissatisfaction with the construction work.
3. That on 17.01.2014, the Complainant was registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and was soon after informed by several aggrieved purchasers of the multiplicity of issues in the flats. In pursuance of the same, the joint secretary of the Complainant filed an RTI application (Ann. A/16, Pg. 195 of Complaint) seeking material information, which revealed the discrepancies between the plan submitted (Ann. A/6, Pg. 144 of Complaint) and the flats. Said discrepancies were also affirmed by the Legal Metrology Department in its report dated 25.06.2015 which takes note of the reduced carpet area (Ann. A/11, Pg. 178 of Complaint) and finds the Opposite Parties in breach.
4. That the Opposite Parties had been repeatedly requested to rectify the major discrepancies, however to no avail (Ann- A/18 Colly Pg. 200 of Complaints. Constrained by the conspicuous silence, the Complainant issued Legal Notice dated 01.08.2015 leading to the filing of the captioned matter under Section 21 (a)(0) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ("Act").CC No.35 of 2016 18
1. DEFICIENCY IN SERVICE
5. Reduced carpet area: Significant discrepancy as detailed below' has been found between carpet area offered as per the Agreement of Sale (Clause 14, Ann. A/4, Pg 49 of Complaint) and the report of the Legal Metrology Department (Para 1-3. Ann A/11. Pg. 181 of Complaint) causing unjust enrichment of INR 4,76,23,600 to Opposite Parties:
Carpet Area as per Carpet Area as per Loss amount to Agreement (in sq. ft.) Legal Metrology individual purchaser report (in sq. ft.)_____ (in INR) 3 BHK 2.5 BHK 3 BHK 2.5 BHK 3 BHK 2.5 BHK 935 825 870.68 767.38 10,93,440 9,79,540
6. Missing lift: The plan as approved by the Thane Municipal Corporation at the behest of which the occupancy certificate was issued ought to have 3 lifts (Ann. A/6, Pg. 144 of Complaint) However the building in actuality consists of only 2 lifts, causing unjust enrichment of INR 40,00,000 to the Opposite Parties.
7. Fire System: The fire system of the building has not been handed over and the Fire NOC has also lapsed. It has further been discovered that the fire alarms are faulty and putting all residents at risk. The actions of the Opposite Parties are in contravention to 'Fire and Life Safety Norms' under National Building Code of India 2016.
II. UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES:
8. Illegal parking charges:
8.1 As per clause 16 of the Agreement (Pg. 50), one free parking was to be allotted to each purchaser. However, after handing over possession, the Opposite parties have sold the parking spaces without issuance of any receipts. A total of three members of the Complainant society have paid INR 5,50,000 to the Opposite Parties for parking space. (Ann. A/13 Colly, Pg. 188 of Complaint).
8.2 In accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt Ltd. vs Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (2010)
9. SCCOnLine SC 9555 (Para 61. P. 28), as the common parking neither a flat, nor garage under Section 2(a-1) of Maharashtra Owners of Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, S Management and Transfer) Act, 1963, the same cannot be sold.
9. Maintenance of unsold facts: Opposite Parties have utilized sample, unsold as their offices; and have not handed over possession of the same CC No.35 of 2016 19 to Complain till date. Further, maintenance charges amounting to INR 16.50,000 in lieu of the same have not been paid. (Ann. A/14, Pg. 191 of Complaint),
10. Club membership fees: An amount of INR 87.96.887 has been collected as club membership fees, however the club has been commissioned in February 2015. generating interest of INR 15.83.439 to the Opposite Parties. (Arm. A/15, Pg. 192 of Complaint).
11. Bank account not maintained: In accordance with Section 5 of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963 and Clause 23 of the Agreement (Pg. 77 of Complaint), the Opposite Parties have failed to maintain a separate bank account for share capital for formation of cooperative society.
12. Misleading advertisement: The Opposite Parties lured purchasers promising facilities as per their advertisements which they have failed to provide. The same amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service under Section 2 (1)(g) of the Act in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Debashis Sinha and Others vs. R.N.R. Enterprises (2023) 3 SCC 195 (Para 14-15, Pg. 35).
13. Occupancy Certificate: The occupancy certificate has been obtained by the Opposite Parties under false pretenses from the Thane Municipal Corporation as there are significant discrepancies in the plan submitted and the flats provided.
14. That the Opposite Parties is liable for having not provided the amenities as promised and the Complainant cannot be left in the lurch as the same impinges on the quality of life for the families of purchasers and the potential for appreciation in the value of the flats. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Wing Commander Arifur Rahman Khan And Aleya Sultana and Others vs. DLF Southern Homes Private Limited (2020) SCC On Line SC 667 (Para 53-54, Pg. 83).
15. That in the light of above facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Commission may be pleased to kindly allow the Prayers in the captioned Consumer Complaint. "
18. The OPs, through their IA/13604/2019, have responded to the allegations made in the Complaint by stating as under:
"A. DISCREPANCY IN CARPET AREA (1) It has been alleged by the Complainant Society that there is a discrepancy in the carpet area of the flats as mentioned in the Agreement for Sale, from what has actually been provided. In this regard, the Inspector of Legal Metrology, Thane II Division, Office of the Inspector of Legal Metrology Thane filed a complaint before Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Thane under section 11 and section 30 of the Legal Metrology Act, CC No.35 of 2016 20 2009 r/w the Legal Metrology (packaged commodities) Rule 2011 which is punishable under section 29 & 30 of Legal Metrology Act 2009. Hereto attached and marked as Annexure A is a copy of the complaint dated 23/12/2015 filed before JMFC Thane being complaint No. 7961 of 2015 under the Legal Metrology Act. 2009.
(ii) Pursuant thereto proceedings took place before JMFC Thane. The relevant sections of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 are extracted below for ready reference.
Section 11- Prohibition of quotation etc otherwise than in terms of standard units of weight, measure or numeration.
(1) No person shall, in relation to any goods, things or service,-
(a) quote, or make announcement of, whether by word of mouth or otherwise, any price or charge, or
(b) issue or exhibit any price list, invoice, cash memo or other document, or
(c) prepare or publish any advertisement, poster or other document, or
(d) indicate the net quantity of a pre-packaged commodity, or
(e) express in relation to any transaction or protection, any quantity or dimension, otherwise than in accordance with the standard unit of weight, measure or numeration.
(2) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not be applicable for export of any goods, things or service.
Section 30- Penalty for transactions in contravention of standard weight or measure Whoever-
(a) in selling any article or thing by weight, measure or number, delivers or causes to be delivered to the purchaser any quantity or number of that article or thing less than the quantity or number contracted for or paid for; or
(b) in rendering any service by weight, measure or number, renders that service less than the service contracted for or paid for: or
(c) in buying any article or thing by weight, measure or number, fraudulently receives, or causes to be received any quantity or number of that article or thing in excess of the quantity or number contracted for or paid for; or
(d) in obtaining any service by weight, measure or number, obtains that service in excess of the service contracted for or paid for, shall be punished with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, and, for the second or CCNo.35of2016 21 subsequent offence, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
As is clear from above section 30 of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 makes it an offence for a person to sell any article or thing less than the quantity in number contracted for or paid for.
(Hi) The Ld. Deputy Controller of Legal Metrology addressed a letter dated 17/06/2016 to Ld. Inspector of Legal Metrology thereby informing that the Opposite Parties have not committed any violation of section 30 of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009. It further directed to Ld. Inspector of Legal Metrology that the complaint be disposed of/removed.
Hereto attached and marked as Annexure B is a copy of the letter of the Ld. Deputy Controller of Legal metrology dated 17.06.16 along with its English translation.
(iv) Upon considering the matter, the Ld. JMFC Thane vide order dated 18/07/2016 disposed of the proceeding of complaint No. 7961 of 2015. Hereto attached and marked as Annexure C is a copy of the Order dated 18/07/2016 ofLd. JMFC Thane passed in complaint No. 7961 of 2015.
B. THIRD LIFT/ELEVATOR The Complainant Society has alleged that the building ought to have had 3 lifts. In this regard it is submitted that the building was initially proposed for 23 floors. However, finally only 20 floors were approved by the concerned authority. Le. the Thane Municipal Corporation. Furthermore, as per the National Building Code for development, 2 lifts of 10 persons capacity, are sufficient for a 20 floor building. Thus the provision of 8 lifts is in compliance with the National Building Code which is the relevant regulation relied upon by the Thane Municipal Corporation.
Hereto attached and marked as Annexure D is a copy of the Certificate dated 09/06/2016 issued by the Architect attesting that the provision of two lifts is in compliance with the National Building Code, along with the necessary workings.
C. UNDERTAKING CUM AFFIDAVIT Members of the Complainant Society had personally taken inspection of the building and the flat prior to taking possession. Furthermore, they had fully satisfied themselves to the quality of construction, necessary amenities and other facilities. In this regard, the flat purchasers had also provided the Opposite Parties with undertakings wherein they had averred that they had personally inspected the said building and the flat and that they were fully satisfied with the construction quality.
Hereto attached and collectively marked as Annexure E are copies of the affidavit/undertaking furnished by some of the flat purchasers.
CC No.35 of 2016 22D. ILLEGALLY COLLECTED PARKING CHARGES It is submitted that that each of the flat purchasers were provided with a free car parking space along with the flat in the podium area.
Hereto attached and marked as Annexure F are copies of letters provided by the Opposite Party to some of flat purchasers in respect of free car parking space.
E. POSSESSION LETTERS It is submitted that all the flat purchasers were given possession in 2012/2013. The Complaint has been filed in 2016, i.e. more than three years after taking possession. Thus, the Complaint is prima facie barred by limitation and not maintainable.
Hereto attached and marked as Annexure G are copies of possession letters of flat purchasers. "
19. We may first take up the issue related to the affidavits and undertakings, as well as the letters that have been extracted hereinabove. The letter dated 03.02.2012, issued by Mr. Raspayle, declares that the area of his flat has been checked and that he had no issues regarding the same. Thereupon, he had requested for handing over possession of the premises in question. This letter has been stated by the complainant society to have been issued under compulsion, as the flat buyers had been waiting for long to receive possession of their flats. This is followed by an affidavit dated 14.02.2012, which narrates that the constructions are as per the approved plan and the occupiers had personally visited and inspected the same flat. A declaration was made in the said affidavit that the occupiers will have no dispute in future about the quality of constructions, as well as the amenities and facilities provided thereunder. It was also undertaken not to raise any claim by way of interest or penalty or damages from the builder.
20. On a perusal of the affidavit, there does not seem to be any declaration regarding any doubt about the area of the flat, as possession was to be taken by them.CC No.35 of 2016 23
21. Then comes the affidavit of another occupier, Ms. Patil, dated 11.02.2013, which in paragraph 4 states that all disputes and differences have been amicably resolved, and they have no claim whatsoever left in respect of the flat in question, which has been physically inspected and checked, including the verification of the carpet area. The possession was accordingly taken, stating that it was being done out of full satisfaction by the allottee.
22. The aforesaid declarations therefore do give semblance of indications about no dispute pending regarding the facilities, the quality of construction, and the carpet area of the flat in question.
23. However, the society communicated with the builders, and the reply filed by them on 09.12.2014 has been extracted hereinabove. While responding, the builder referred to the clarification given by them through their letter dated 14.10.2014. From the record, we find that these communications do indicate that certain deficiencies were existing even after taking possession. That was acknowledged by the opposite party through their mail dated 04.10.2014. The same is extracted hereinunder:
From: VMAroraa fmailto:[email protected] Sent: 04 October 2014 18:39 To: Sanjeeva Singh; [email protected]: '[email protected]';.'a. ramanath'; 'Runwal Pearl'; '[email protected]*; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; 'Shantanu Deshmukh'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; 'Klran Chavan'; [email protected]; 'Hemant KT Subject: RE: Happy Dussehra - Customer woes . Importance: High Dear Sanjeeva, The project work & clubhouse work Is still under completion and the above snags would be rectified. We have taken not of your suggestions and our facilities team shall evaluate them 8< revert to you shortly.
Mr. Dutt, Please oversee the suggestions / concerns put forth by Mr, Sanjeeva andsee how we can improve the clubhouse facilities.
Regards, Vvikas Aroraa DIRECTOR - MARKETING & SALES E ■ [email protected] M-+919920025624 CC No.35 of 2016 24
24. The flat denial regarding the third lift, there is no doubt that the provision of the third lift was not only promised, but was part of the sanctioned plan. A subsequent assessment by the builder that the two lifts meet the necessary requirement and are sufficient therefore confirms that the third lift had been included in the plan and the builder did not provide the same. What is obvious is that the third lift was a component of the cost price realised by the builder for the flat and the amenities to be provided therein. The only possible conclusion therefore is that by not providing the third lift, the opposite party builder has saved money by not delivering the facility of the third lift. The complainants are therefore justified in contending that this is a clear unfair trade practice, which persisted even after the possession had been taken over to the satisfaction of the occupants, but in fact was a clear deprivation of the facility on the ground of two lifts being sufficient for the allottees. In our opinion, a mere sufficiency as assessed by the opposite party does not absolve him of his obligation to provide a lift for which he has charged consideration. Alternatively, the consideration so charged has to be refunded if it has not been utilised for providing the lift as promised. This deficiency therefore deserves to be compensated. The possession of the clubhouse and the swimming pool had been delayed, and this fact stands admitted from a recital in the letter of the opposite party dated 09.12.2014, where it is stated that the amenities are developed in phases and may not get ready by the time possession is given. It is therefore evident that the clubhouse and the swimming pool were also delayed, and the charges for the said facilities had been collected along with the payments which had already been received. It is therefore obvious that the clubhouse had been commissioned with a delay, and therefore some compensation also requires to be awarded to the complainants on that count.
CC No.35 of 2016 2525. However, the membership fee that has been collected by the builder is a life membership fee. There is no doubt that the club has been I commissioned, even though belatedly, and therefore, in our opinion, the club membership fee cannot be refunded, as the club facilities continue to be available to the occupants of the society. Accordingly, this request for refund of the club membership fee may not be justified. The car parking areas have been provided for, and the dispute appears to be about its actual demarcation and the like. The charge of the car parking fee is part of the agreement and therefore cannot be said to be an amenity that was to be provided within the cost of the flat. The refund of car parking charges therefore also does not seem to be justified. There is a claim by the society calling upon the builder to pay maintenance charges towards unsold flats, sales office, and the sample flat of the builder, etc., after obtaining the occupation certificate. This is a money claim and not a deficiency in service regarding the delivery and occupation of the premises. Non-payment of maintenance charges by any occupant is therefore a matter of recovery and not essentially a matter of deficiency in service.
26. The question of deficiency in the carpet area, as was alleged, was contested even before the authorities of the Legal Metrology Department, where the issue of any violation in respect of the measurements was raised. The Metrology Department, even though had issued the notice, ultimately dropped the proceedings after the complaint was filed before the Judicial Magistrate under Section 11 read with Section 30 of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009, and the rules framed thereunder. This has been explained by the opposite parties through IA No. 13604 of 2019, that has been extracted hereinabove. To that effect, the opposite parties have relied upon the communication of the Deputy Controller of the Legal Metrology Department dated 17.06.2016, whereby the Metrology CC No.35 of 2016 26 Department had made a request to close the proceedings. That was done by the concerned Judicial Magistrate on 18.07.2016. The same was disposed of after some compounding fee was deposited.
27. The aforesaid proceedings do not exactly adjudicate upon the shortage of the area, but the proceedings seem to have been closed as if no offence under the Metrology Act had been committed. Nonetheless, the fact remains that the said proceedings relating to the measurement were closed on 18.07.2016.
28. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, vide Section 3, clearly specifies that the Act is in addition to and not in derogation of any other law for the time being in force. Interestingly, the present complaint was filed on 12.01.2016, almost six months prior to the closure of the proceedings under the Metrology Act referred to above. The Consumer Commission therefore does not get deprived of its jurisdiction to entertain this plea, which had been raised prior to the closure of the proceedings referred to above.
29. The same therefore has to be considered in the light of the pleadings that have been brought on record. The discrepancy alleged in the carpet area has been attempted to be avoided by categorically stating that the occupants had obtained possession after satisfying themselves about the carpet area, for which reference has been made to the letters and affidavits given by some of the occupants admitting that there is no dispute left with regard to the carpet area. We have already noted above that possession was taken by the occupants in the circumstances explained by them. The opposite party has also come up with the contention that during the measurement dispute, the proportionate common area was not measured while calculating the CC No.35 of 2016 27 I carpet area. The proportionate common area and facilities are pertinent to the flat, including the balcony area, which, according to the opposite party, had to be taken into account, and therefore the calculation made by the complainant is contrary to the same. To us, it seems that this aspect becomes complicated on account of the affidavits signed by the occupants regarding their satisfaction of the carpet area as also there being no further dispute in respect thereof. We therefore find it difficult to proceed further to find any deficiency in respect of the carpet area as alleged. Thus, it will not be possible to extend any benefit of any such allegation regarding the deficiency in the carpet area.
30. We therefore partly allow this complaint in respect of not providing and installing the third lift. We have not been able to gather any material so as to compute the cost of the third lift and its installation to be worth Rs.40 lakhs. We therefore award a sum of Rs.20 lakhs to the complainant society towards the cost of the third lift, together with 6% interest thereon, to be payable from the date of the occupancy certificate issued to the opposite party, i.e., 30.11.2012. The justification given for not installing the lift is no excuse for retaining the money that was realised as consideration from the complainants towards the sanctioned third lift. The said amount shall be paid within three months from today, or else the rate of interest shall stand enhanced to 9%. We further find that there was a delay in the commissioning of the club, and therefore we award a lump sum amount of Rs. 10 lakhs with 6% interest thereon from the date of the issuance of the occupancy certificate by the opposite party to the complainant society, to be paid within a period of three months, or else the same shall invite further interest of 9%.
31. We further find that the society is entitled to receive all the audited accounts and other related documents. In the event the same have not CC No.35 of 2016 28 been handed over as yet, the society shall be entitled to receive the same, which shall be handed over by the opposite party. The society shall indicate the documents which have not been handed over, and the builder shall be obliged to hand them over within three months from today.
32. The relief prayed for in respect of the no-objection certificate from the Fire Department is also the obligation of the builder, and therefore the same shall be ensured after completing all such formalities within three months from today. The complaint is therefore partly allowed with the aforesaid directions.
Sd/-
( A.P. SAHI, J.) PRESIDENT Sd/-
( BHARATKUMAR PANDYA) MEMBER lndu/PS/B-1/CAV CC No.35 of 2016 29