Journalism of Courage
Advertisement
Premium

Builder told to pay damages for delay in handing over flat

The UT district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed Uppal’s Marble Arch,Manimajra,to pay interest on the amount deposited by the complainant,along with Rs 5,000 as litigation costs,for delay in giving possession of a flat.

The UT district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed Uppal’s Marble Arch,Manimajra,to pay interest on the amount deposited by the complainant,along with Rs 5,000 as litigation costs,for delay in giving possession of a flat.

According to the complainants,Romesh Pandey and Dr Sanjoli Chimni Pandey,residents of Sector 19,they had paid the builder Rs 1.45 crore,around 95% of the sale price, for a four-bedroom apartment. The builder was hand over the flat by the end of 2008.

However,the complainants accused Uppal’s of breaching the agreement by incorporating clause 16 in the terms and conditions,according to which,the possession was to be handed over in March 2009.

When the complainants sought information under the RTI Act,they were astounded to find that the completion certificate applied for by the builders had been rejected on technical grounds.

Appalled,the complainants sent a legal notice to the builder in May 2009. The complainants alleged that the builder’s act amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

In its reply,Uppal’s stated that they had submitted the building plans to the Chandigarh Administration well within time,but the authorities delayed the matter at various levels by raising baseless objections.

They further stated that the possession of the flat could not be offered on account of the global recession coupled with technical and legal hurdles.

Story continues below this ad

The builder,however,added that the building plans were recently sanctioned and he would be in a position to hand over the possession of the flat in question some time in March 2010.

After taking into consideration both the parties’ account,the forum decided the case in the favour of the complainants.

“It is common knowledge that the builders first give fanciful advertisements to attract gullible investors and receive enormous amounts from them,but thereafter do not stick to the schedule of construction. It is indeed an unfair trade practice on the part of Uppal’s,” read the order.

Commenting on the delay in sanctioning of the building plans as cited by the builders,the forum stated: “Their (Uppal’s) contention is that the Chandigarh Administration kept delaying the sanction of the building plan and it appears the building plan had not been sanctioned at the time it issued the advertisement. They were,therefore,telling lies to the public when they issued the newsletter to mislead customers into believing that the building plans had been sanctioned.”

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Tags:
  • builder
Edition
Install the Express App for
a better experience
Featured
Trending Topics
News
Multimedia
Follow Us
Tavleen Singh writesWhy Sycophants cause more harm than good
X