| Case name: | Ratna Alexander Bhambhani Vs. Ruby Complexes Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. |
| Case number: | Complaint No. 80 of 2001 |
| Court: | Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Ahmedabad |
| Bench: | N.G. Nandi, J. President Dr. Jatin P. Vaidya, Member |
| Decided on: | 18.04.2006 |
- BRIEF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
- Mrs. Bhambhani is NRI staying in London. She desired to return to India and chose to settle in Baroda in or around 1992.
- Complainant came to know about Tirth Apartment Scheme and after going through the brochure, visited office of Opp. 1, who said the price of flat is Rs. 1,200 per sq. ft. because of high class materials. The total amount that complainant will have to pay will be Rs. 17,00,000.
- The complainant selected Flat No. 403. Meeting with complainant was held on 26.12.1996, where all opponents were present, they discussed in detail, agreed for necessary adjustment in flat.
- The complainant also made official amount part payment by 3 cheques “Payable to some relatives of Mr. Bhadresh K. Shah in UK”. Agreements for Sale were executed. On January 27, 1997 the peon of opponents approached for signature on blank stamp papers, which complainant refused.
- Opponents from UK assured of progress –in work and handing over of flat latest by January 1998 end. She arrived from UK on 17.11.1997 and saw that construction was grossly incomplete and opponents had no answer for the same. Opps. also paid Rs. 20,000 by cheque and Rs. 15,000 as cash as interest earlier in year 1998. Complainant was assured of Registration and Revenue Record.
- Complainant was called on 23.2.2000 to the office of opponents for registration, but money was asked and no process done for registration. Complainant left, but overhead the opponents say “She is an old woman. She will die in few years and flat will be ours”.
- Complainant says she had paid total price of flat plus Rs. 40,000 maintenance, Rs. 50,000 for car park and Rs. 25,000 plus Rs. 42,500 for registration fee, Rs 25,000 for development charges and all other amounts. Complainant has also supplied bathroom fittings. The name plate of complainant was removed from building board.
- Complainant says she has suffered tremendous mental torture and agony, physical strain, resulting in ill-health. She has suffered hardships, humiliation, harassment, savings of her life and asks for compensation of Rs. 19,99,950 and prays for completion of remaining work in flat as per agreement, pay damages of Rs. 19,99,950 with interest at 13.5% from date of this application.
- ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT:
Whether the complainant should be granted reliefs?
- RATIO OF THE COURT
- The Court held that it was clear that complainant’s claim for purchase, transport and maintenance of furniture bought in UK and brought here. The opponent could not be saddled for the expenses so incurred (Amount being Rs. 5,75,000).
- It was further observed that here was no evidence or convincing presentation of or Rs. 1,38,000 claimed as expenses. There is nothing on record to show that Rs. 65,000 was received as Registration charges. The opponents also on affidavit denied having received so called registration charges and there is no receipt for Rs. 3,50,000 claimed for left out work in flat is taken care of wide supra.
- Other claims of prayers were also not convincing and proved. Oral submission of L.A. for opponents for Rs. 2,00,000 (for covered car park, maintenance and development) from complainant was not borne out from agreement or from written statement of opponents.
- There was nothing from complainant’s side showing such payment in form of receipt for the said purpose. The brochure is also silent on the above work. The opponents did not show any positive evidence that complainant shall have to pay extra Rs. 2,00,000 in their agreement or any other documents. Therefore, question of awarding such amount did not arise.
- DECISION HELD BY COURT:
- The complaint was allowed partly.
- The Court directed that opponents shall carry out left out work as per brochure in flat No. 403 in months’ time after mutually adjusting the date. Complainant was supposed to assist the opponents in giving access to the opponent for the work to be done, failing which the opponents shall pay Rs. 1,27,650
- If the work in said flat is not completed within 2 months from this order, the opponent shall pay interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of this order. Opponent shall also pay cost of Rs. 2,500 to the complainant.