A penalty of
Rs. 1 crore has been imposed by the apex consumer commission on Ansal Properties
and Industries Ltd (API) for its failure to provide a country club promised
by it to its customers as part of a scheme for developing individual farm
houses.
The NCDRC (National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission) also directed the realtor to pay Rs. 25,000 to each person who had bought a farm under its Pushpanjali Farms Scheme and also directed it to pay Rs. 5 lakh as cost to the association which represented the buyers / or customers.
A bench presided by justice Mr. J.M Malik said, "The country club was projected & committed as a special feature of the Pushpanjali Farms, marketed by the opposite party (API). The commitment to provide it has been admitted by API. Therefore, failure to provide it for nearly 15 years and the subsequent unilateral decision to withdraw this commitment, are both highly unjustifiable.
This conduct of API amounts to deficiency in service & an unfair trade practice. Considering the time that has elapsed since the commitment was made and unilaterally withdrawn, we direct API to pay compensation of Rs. 25,000 to every purchaser of a farm in this project, whose sale deed was registered on or before the date of complaint."
We direct API to pay a sum of Rs. 100 lakh (Rs. 1 Crore) as punitive damages. This shall be paid into the Consumer Welfare Fund of the Central government, in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Rules 1987 and pay a sum of Rs. five (5) lakh to the complainant (association) FORWA towards costs."
The NCDRC's order came on a complaint filed in 1995 by the Pushpanjali Farm Owners and Residents Association (FORWA) alleging non-provision of a country club and delay in completion of the developmental works under API's scheme of 1979.
Under the scheme, API had proposed to build farmhouses or / individual owners and the project included developmental works like roads, water supply, electrification, sewage disposal etc and also contemplated maintenance of common areas, common facilities & other services, by a maintenance company called Star Estate Management Pvt Ltd (SEMPL), FORWA had said in its complaint.
It had also said that the scheme originally envisaged building 189 farms of 1.5 acres each, which was later modified to nearly 80 farms of about of 2.5 acres each and that it also carried a special feature in the form of a Country Club.
In its defence, API had contended that the delay in developmental work & the non-provision of country club were due to non-payment of maintenance charges by farmhouse owners as well as the low-occupancy of the farmhouses developed under its project.
The commission rejected the contention with regard to non provision of country club said " If the consumer were to allow service providers to benefit from such conduct, they will be encouraged to renege on their commitments without any fear of the law".
It however, agreed that there was sufficient cause for delay in execution of developmental works.
No comments:
Post a Comment