Consumer Forum mightier than Govt!

consumer courtBy I C Naik

One can conclude from experiences that the consumer forum is proving mightier than the Government. Call it lack of will or lack of boldness on the part of citizens, a simple solution of getting conveyance through Consumer courts escaped the attention cooperative activists equally: State Authorities do not consider cooperative housing society members as a vote bank.  The whole matter is quite creepy indeed.

In yet another case of the Builder  sitting over the title deeds which belonged to cooperative society having fully paid off its price 15 years ago, the Builder has been reportedly ordered to pay Rs 3L to C H S in Bhandup ( Eastern Suburb of Mumbai), for not providing conveyance deed.

A builder has been ordered to pay Rs 3.10 lakh compensation to a Bhandup housing society for failing to procure the conveyance deed 15 years after the flat owners established a cooperative housing society. Ganesh Builders will have to procure Neelima Apartment (B Building)’s document within six months. The forum said the builder was guilty of deficiency in service.

Members of the building got to gather and dared the builder by filing a complaint on October 10, 2010, before the additional Mumbai suburban district consumer disputes redressal forum. Their simple case was that procuring the document was binding on the builder under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act and that the developer was making attempts to construct another building in the same area. Builder retorted with the argument that the society had filed a false complaint with the sole intention of causing harassment !!! (the other way for a change).

Reportedly he claimed that the area near the building was divided into three parts with a large portion of housing slums. The builder said that after construction of this and another neighbouring building, redevelopment for slum dwellers had commenced and that it had the requisite permissions.

The forum observed that despite getting into an agreement with the flat buyers in 1982, the builder had failed to procure the document. It further pointed out that the builder had not submitted any substantial arguments explaining the delay. The forum said instead, all that the builder said is that the demands of the society were illegal with no backing of any law. Forum ordered compensation It observed that the builder had failed to provide the necessary document despite it being mandatory.

 

Exit mobile version