Last Updated on December 4, 2021 by Satish Mishra
Post covers Consumer Complaint Gillco Developers & Builders Pvt Ltd for deficiency in services related to defective wood work.
GILCO DEVELOPERS & BUILDERS PVT. … VS AMARDEEP SINGH
This post talks about an appeal filed before the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Punjab, challenging the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum dated 31.08.2012, where the respondent was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3 lacs to the complainant to enable him to repair the defective wood work and wooden flooring and to a construct cabinet in the kitchen and also to provide strip of black granite and skirting in the living area. They were also asked to pay a sum of Rs. 1 lac as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation expenses.
Also Read- Bestech Consumer Complaint Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali
APPELLANTS/ OPPOSITE PARTY
Gilco Developers & Builders Pvt. Limited
REPOSNDENT/ COMPLAINANT
Amardeep Singh
CORUM
Shri Gurcharan Singh Saran, Presiding Judicial Member
Shri Jasbir Singh Gill, Member
FACTS:
The complaint was filed by the complainant under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite party on the allegations that he wanted to buy a three bed room flat for his family. He had visited the Ops and had checked their sample flat. The complainant after giving the assurance and promises of the opposite party that an exact replica of the sample flat would be given to the complainant agreed to pay a flat in the Gilco Towers. As per the terms and conditions settled between the parties, the exact replica of the sample flat qua the flooring and wood work and other material was to be given to the complainant. The complainant made full payment as was allotted Apartment No. J-202, Second Floor vide their letter F1-0169 dated 13.12.2010. He was given the possession of the flat on 12.1.2011 and was also issued a No Due Certificate.
Also Read- M/S Gillco Developers And Builder … vs Yashpal Singh
The complainant had spent all his life savings in the said flat but was shocked to see that the flat sold to him was nothing like the sample flat with regard to woodwork and material used in flooring. One side of the modular kitchen as shown in the sample flat was totally missing and assurance was given by the opposite party to the complainant that the specifications of the flat will be according to the sample flat but in fact the OP used cheap flooring tiles and very poor quality and colour in wood work. Black granite strip on the flooring and skirting was missing from the flat given to the complainant. The complainant approached the opposite party number of times to get the dispute resolved but to no avail, rather the office of the opposite party asked the complainant to pay an extra amount of Rs. 24,550/- as security in lieu of electricity connection whereas the complainant had already cleared all the dues and no due certificate was issued on 10.1.2011. The Ops had not acted according to their assurance, therefore, there is no deficiency in services on the part of the OP. Legal notice was given to the Op but no reply was given.
Also Read- Gillco Developers and Builders Pvt Ltd Consumer RERA Case
ARGUMENTS BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS:
The counsel held that the objections raised by the complainant were false, frivolous and baseless facts, with regard to the materials used in the flat. The complainant had checked the same at the time of purchasing and taking the possession and had signed in token of acceptance of the material used in it to his entire satisfaction. They pleaded that the complainant had not approached the forum with clean hands. Even after taking the possession on 12.1.2011 the complainant had not paid any heed for executing the Sale Deed and the present complaint has been filed when the Opposite party were making a plan to resume the flat. The Local Commissioner had specifically mentioned that the flat has maintenance problem only rather than material/specification problems and that there was no evidence with regard to any defect in the quality, specifications and other material; there was no evidence that in the living area strip of black granite and skirting has not been provided. The claim of the complainant based upon sample flat is unsustainable and not enforceable. Moreover, there was no rationale to award Rs. 3 lacs as compensation for the alleged deficiency and Rs. 1 lac as compensation.
Also Read- Gillco Developers And Builders … vs Manbir Singh
ARGUMENTS BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE COMPLAINANT:
The counsel for the complainant alleged that the flay provided to the complainant was not according to the sample flat brochure showed to him, in which details of Civil work has been included. As per the allegations in the complaint, it was pleaded that the wood work and the material used in flooring and one side kitchen cabinet was incomplete, tiles used were of cheap quality. The wood work was of very poor quality and colour. The complete black granite strips on the flooring and skirting was missing.
Also Read- Orders/ Judgements – RERA Punjab
JUDGEMENT:
After going through the findings of the Local Commissioner, appointed for reassessing the flat, the court came to the conclusion that there is no evidence with regard to any defect in the quality, specifications and other materials used in the flat of the complainant except the living area strip of black granite and skirting, as the two were not provided and for that reason, the sum of Rs. 3 lacs was allowed. Since there is no specific agreement, which was required to be executed between the parties as per PAPRA and in case no such specific agreement has come on between the parties then certainly, the specifications should have been according to the sample flat.
Also Read- Sh.Rajesh Dani v. M/s. Gillco Developers and Builders Pvt. Ltd.
Regarding the question of compensation, it was held that it was in consonance with the deficiency in services due to the missing things stated above. The appellants argues that the amount for compensation and the compensation with regard to harassment was too excessive. Accepting their plea, the court awarded Rs. 3 lacs on account of wooden cabinet in the kitchen, black granite strip in the living area and for skirting, and the compensation from Rs. 3 lacs to Rs. 60,000/- and compensation for harassment from Rs. 1 lac to Rs. 20,000/-. Litigation expenses will remain the same.
For case specific advice, please connect with Top Best Expert Legal Consultants Attorneys in Real Estate/Property Estate/Consumer Court and Consumer Protection Dispute/ Consumer Grievances and Complaints/RERA Lawyers Advocates in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Kharar Derabassi Zirakpur etc.
More on 99888-17966.
