‘No free parking space’ for 2 years despite promise, homebuyer wins slot from builder

The complaint was filed by a man who was allotted an apartment in a real estate project. According to him, every homebuyer was entitled to one free open car parking space under the published terms and conditions in the project’s price list. He alleged that despite occupying the apartment for more than two years and repeatedly requesting the allotment, no parking space was provided to him. He stated that the builder later informed him that all available spaces had already been allotted to other buyers.

The complainant further alleged that the project had more parking slots than apartments and claimed that multiple spaces had been allotted to certain buyers, depriving him of his promised allotment. He also accused the developers of pressuring him to withdraw separate legal proceedings relating to electricity-related disputes in exchange for allotment of the parking space.

It was stated that by failing to fulfil the contractually promised open parking space and engaging in bad-faith tactics to obstruct consumer remedies, the builder and developer engaged in a clear deficiency of service and unfair trade practice, causing severe mental distress and harassment to the complainant.

The developer denied the allegations and said that it had no contractual relationship with the complainant, pointing out that its name was absent from all primary documents submitted by the complainant. It also raised objections regarding the limitation and maintainability of the case.

Builder liable: Forum

The commission noted that the project documents identified the developer and the builder as the entities involved in the development of the project. It found merit in the developer’s argument that it was not a party to the relevant contractual documents. “A perusal of the complaint and its annexures indicates that the submission of Opposite Party No. 1 (developer) is correct, as its name appears nowhere in the documentation,” the commission observed.

It, however, found that the opposite party no. 2 (builder), who was a party to the complaint and was identified as a co-developer in the project’s price list, remained liable for fulfilling the promise made to buyers. The commission held that its failure to provide the contractually promised free open car parking space constitutes a clear deficiency of service.

Allowing the complaint against the builder, the commission directed it to provide one free open car parking space to the complainant within 30 days and also ordered it to pay Rs 2,000 towards litigation costs. The complaint against the developer was dismissed.

Takeaway

A builder’s failure to provide a free parking space contractually promised to a homebuyer amounts to deficiency in service, and the consumer commission can direct it to honour the commitment.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and Union territories (Uttar Pradesh: 1800-1800-300) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.

Don’t miss out on these stories:

Study-abroad firm ‘fails to process Canada visa or pay tuition’, woman wins Rs 11 lakh

TN woman loses Rs 50,000 in ‘phishing scam’, wins Rs 1.1 lakh compensation from bank

West Bengal cops seize used car over ‘forged’ documents, buyer wins Rs 4.25 lakh payout