Mumbai: Commission directs Rs 10.5L be given with interest to flat buyers

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) has directed two construction firms and their directors to refund over Rs10.25 lakh to three flat buyers with 12% interest per annum, from 2012 till the date of payment. Additionally, each of the three home buyers will get Rs1.25 lakh for mental harassment and litigation costs. If the above amount is not paid in 30 days, the same will have to be paid with 15% interest per annum. Earlier, the FPJ had reported about the same firms and their directors being ordered to give Rs 33.5 lakh to eight flat buyers and similar compensation as in the present case.

The three orders dated September 23, 2022 (uploaded November 12, 2022) were given by Justice SP Tavade (president) and ST Barne (judicial member) of the SCDRC. The orders were passed on complaints by Mumbai resident Mangilal Jat and Mira-Bhayandar couple Puneet and Nidhi Gupta. They had all filed a complaint against Andheri-based Ionic Realty (Eco City) Pvt Ltd, its directors and Crystal Homecon Pvt Ltd and its director.

The complainants had booked flats ranging from 365sq ft in Ionic Eco City – a project that the opponents had advertised as coming up in Palghar district. The flats were booked in different periods in 2012 and allotment letters were issued for the same. The complainants had separately paid between Rs3.25 lakh and Rs3.75 lakh for their respective flats. After receiving part consideration, Ionic informed that they have transferred development rights to Homecon. The total consideration for the flats was between Rs11.90 lakh and Rs15.08 lakh.

However, when the agreement was not done despite follow-ups, the complainants visited the spot and were surprised to see someone else's board put up on the property. They eventually learned that the opposite parties did not have the right to develop the property and filed a police complaint. The case was transferred to the economic offences wing. When Ionic approached the sessions court, their bail plea was rejected. Then, before the High Court, the developer said it will clear the dues of flat purchasers but that did not happen.

Even after complaints were filed and notices issued, the opponents did not turn up for the hearing. Eventually, the SCDRC had to publish a newspaper notice and move exparte like it did in earlier cases. The commission said that there was a deficiency in service and unfair trade practices. It stated that since there is no scope of the flats coming up, the opponents will have to give a refund with interest to be calculated from the date when amounts were paid to the actual date of payment.