Holding it accountable for deficiency in service and failure to execute a conveyance deed, and also failure to provide the necessary water connection and other facilities as promised, the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Commission has ordered Evershine Builders to pay Vasai’s Capricorn Co-operative Housing Society Rs 29 lakh in three months and pay an additional 9% interest until it makes the payment.
The housing society, which has 160 flats in eight buildings, had complained to the commission that the builder had provided only a draft deed for conveyance in January 2008, and repeated requests fell on deaf years. The commission directed the builder to provide a deed of conveyance with all relevant information. The society complained to the commission in 2014. It said a set of eight buildings were constructed on seven plots and the society was registered in March 2003.
The builder told the commission the original owner had bought several properties in villages at Vasai. It contended that it was not the owner of the land and under a tripartite agreement was only entitled to construct 51 buildings consisting of five clusters on the demarcated portion and was also entitled to sell flats on ownership basis to prospective buyers. Stating that the owner should be made party to the complaint, the builder said it cannot convey something that does not belong to it.
The commission pointed towards the flat agreement and said it was executed only between the buyer and the builder and was binding on both parties. “The opposite party (builder) cannot take the stand at this stage that ‘owner’ is a necessary party to this consumer complaint. The party also cannot take the stand that for execution of the conveyance deed, consent of owner is required, especially when there is no agreement or contract between the purchaser member and the owner.”
The compensation includes Rs 3.2 lakh (Rs 2,000 for each member) for mental harassment, damages and loss. The builder will also have to refund Rs 9 lakh for a corpus collected with the assurance that it would be for the maintenance of common infrastructure. The society had complained to the commission that the funds were never utilized, nor any amenities provided.