To
The Managing Director,
RPS Group,
New Delhi
Dear Sir,
I take the liberty of bringing your kind notice to the following facts:
The Honourable Supreme Court of India in the year 1993 has ruled in favour of MK Gupta in his case against the Lucknow Development Authority for not delivering his flat on time. The said judgment has brought housing construction under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
The Supreme Court ruled that “the purpose of widening the definition (of service) is to include in it not only the day-to-day buying and selling activity undertaken by a common man, but even activities that are otherwise not commercial in nature, yet partake of a character in which some benefit is conferred on the consumer… Similarly, when a statutory authority develops a land, allots a site, or constructs a house for the benefit of a common man, it is considered a ‘service’ similar to that by a builder or contractor.
When possession of the property is not given within the stipulated period, the delay is denial of service. Such disputes or claims are not with respect to immovable property but ‘deficiency in rendering of service’ of a particular standard, quality or grade. A person who applies for allotment of a building site, or flat constructed by the development authority, or entered into an agreement with a builder or contractor is a potential user and the nature of construction is covered in the expression service of any description”.
Flat bearing no 901 in Purple Hazel 3 ( B-3/PH-3/901) was applied by me on 23rd Sept 2006 and a Buyers agreement was entered between RPS and me on 22nd December 2006 with a stipulation that the said flat is to be delivered within 36 months from the date of agreement. The said flat leave alone being handed over is yet to be completed even after 84 months have elapsed. Against the basic sale price of Rs 32,23,800 Rupees ( a total sum of Rs 32,57,948 has been demanded by RPS under various heads which incidentally includes service Tax on enhanced EDC, which is not only arbitrary but illegal as well) a sum of Rs 3266007 has been paid as on date.
Considering the above, I am of the opinion that a ‘ deficiency in rendering service’ has occurred for which I call upon you to pay interest @ 24% per annum compounded on an annualized basis on the money paid by me in several installments and also call upon you to complete the flat in all respects including but not limited to obtaining OC for same and adjust such sum (as may have accrued on the date of offering possession ) with further installments due and payable by me under various heads and prepare a fresh statement of accounts as on the date of offering possession reflecting all of above to be sent to me by email for my scrutiny and observance.
Further the loss on account of Income Tax rebates (falling under various sections of the Income tax Act which otherwise would have been claimed by me but cannot be claimed now, as having retired I have no Salary Income now) plus the Rent paid by me in securing an alternate accommodation due to your not handing over the flat in 2009 also requires to be addressed by you and you may please advise how you plan to compensate me for that.
I shall be obliged for a prompt action from your end.
Best Wishes,
B N Panda
+91 7381700000
Leave a Reply