The District Consumer Redressal Forum directed a realty firm, Green Space Infraheights Private Limited in Chandigarh to pay a compensation of Rs 25,000 to a consumer residing in Ambala. They were also directed to pay Rs 5500 as litigation charges. This charge came after the firm refused to give the consumer a refund after she wanted to surrender her apartment. The District Forum also directed the firm to refund the money the client had already deposited along with 9% interest that she had paid through a loan taken from PNB Housing Finance Limited, including interest or penalty that she had accrued and had to pay to the bank.
The real estate firm was also ordered to waive any outstanding amount. The woman had signed an agreement to buy a flat in Shree Vardhman Green Space in Panchkula in 2015 for Rs. 19.62 Lakhs of which she had already paid Rs. 13.67 Lakhs. The possession of the flat was to be handed over to her within a year of the allotment but the said possession was delayed. In February 2018 the woman suffered severe chest pains and was advised surgery. As a result of this the woman requested the realtor for a refund on the surrender of her flat as she required the money for her surgery. A representative of the real estate firm informed her of the cancellation charges but her subsequent requests for a refund were blatantly ignored y the firm. When the issue came in front of the forum the representatives of the firm informed the forum that they had raised demands of the instalments according to the agreement but the woman had failed to meet said demands within the stipulated time.
They also argued that they had informed the woman of the cancellation charges and the reminder for the payment of instalments were raised only because she had failed to respond to the letter on cancellation charges. The forum while carrying out its duties had adjourned the matter multiple times between November 2018 to August 2019 to enable both the parties to reach an amicable settlement but all such efforts failed and no action was taken to address or redress the woman’s grievances. The forum said that the woman had performed her duty by delivering the draft deed of a settlement but there was no action by the opposite party which is the real estate firm to redress the grievances of the complainant by refunding her deposited amount.
The forum ruled in favour of the complainant and said that there was gross lapse and deficiency on part of the real estate firm while rendering services to the complainant which goes against the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to the Act the firm had failed to perform its duty to redress the grievances of the consumer and was therefore held liable.
For case specific advice, one can contact best/top/expert Real Estate Lawyer Advocate practicing in District Consumer Forum (Chandigarh, Panchkula Mohali) or State Consumer Commission (Chandigarh Punjab Haryana).
This post is written by Aradhya Singh. For more, dial 99888-17966.