Give Flat or 1cr to Buyer, Consumer Forum to Bldr.

Rebecca Samervel TNN 

Mumbai: The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed a builder to hand over a 712 sq ft flat at Sion within four months or pay Rs 1.04 crore compensation to an ex-serviceman who had booked the flat in 2005, but has not got possession. 
    The commission observed, “Because of the delay in getting possession, complainant is deprived of his dream of having his own house… Rates of real estate have skyrocketed and increased geometrically, the opponents have utilized the hard-earned money of consideration paid by the complainant and one cannot say how long he will have to wait.” 

    Amarjeet Singh Baryam Singh filed the complaint in the commission on July 19, 2011, against M/s Lakadawala Developers Pvt Ltd and its directors, for deficiencyin service. 

    While the flat was booked in August 2005, the agreement was registered in March 2006. Singh paid the entire amount of Rs 24.65 lakh to the builder and construction was to be completed by the end of 2007. He contended that that he tried to contact the builder from time to time but never received possession. Singh alleged that due to this, he was financially overburdened and was undergoing tremendous mental agony. The builder submitted that the property was being developed under the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme and had encountered some trouble. The builder alleged that the building was completed but had to be demolished due to some problems. The firm further contended that as per the agreement, the complainant is entitled to take possession of the flat on completion of the project and if it is delayed, the builder will not be liable. They said that they were willing to hand over possession after completion of the project or alternatively Singh could take a refund. The commission, however, said that the efforts made by the builder look half-hearted. “We are not convinced about the efforts taken by the opponents. Similarly, the complainant cannot wait indefinitely to have his own house,” the commission said. 

    Taking into account the market rate of the property, the commission held that the current value of the flat was Rs 99.27 lakh.

Source:::: The Times of India, 18-01-2013, p.02, http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW&AW=1358485709575

Maximum consumer complaints filed in city against builders

Rebecca Samervel TNN 

Mumbai: An RTI reply has revealed that the maximum number of complaints received by consumer forums in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) pertains to housing. Of 24,278 complaints MMR’s six forums received in roughly the last 15 years, housing leads with 7,499, followed by insurance, which is a distant second with 4,291 complaints. 

    Experts say the reason is skyrocketing housing prices accompanied by increasing malpractice by builders. Unsurprisingly, the greatest chunks of housing complaints are from Thane (4,670) and Navi Mumbai (1,031), which have witnessed frenetic construction activity in recent years. 

    However, South Mumbai, which has MMR’s most expensive real estate pockets, received a comparatively low 702 complaints. 

Few files a month enough to bury consumer courts under backlog 
In July, Two Forums Did Not Dispose Of A Single Complaint 
    Over 25 years after the enactment of the Consumer Protection Act, consumer forums across the Mumbai M e t ro p o l i t a n Re g i o n (MMR) are battling the problem of pendency. While this is witnessed by other judicial bodies as well, what makes it exceptional in the case of consumer forums is that the number of cases received by them is not remotely close to what, say, the criminal courts receive. 
    The reply to an RTI application by activist Chetan Kothari shows that by August this year, the Thane consumer forum had the highest backlog of cases (1,721), followed by the Mumbai suburban forum (1,508 cases). Typically, the forums receive a few dozen complaints a month. For instance, in July, Thane received 42 complaints and the suburbs 59. The same month, the Thane and the Thane additional forum (which hears complaints from Navi Mumbai) did not dispose of a single case. 
    The numbers have gone up since June, when the Thane forum had 1,679 pending cases, the suburban forum 1,472, the additional suburban forum (distinct from the suburban forum) 658, the South Mumbai forum 646, the Thane additional forum 379 and the Central Mumbai forum 425. 
    Overall (after July), the additional Mumbai suburban forum has 673 pending cases, the South Mumbai forum 652, the Central Mumbai forum 467 and the Thane additional forum 416. Even cases that are 5-10 years old are pending. The suburban forum has the maximum of such cases (499), followed by Central Mumbai (370), Thane (81) and South Mumbai (76). 
    Advocate Anand Patwardhan blamed the problem on a lack of manpower and vacant seats across the forums. “The problem has persisted as there has been no appointment of members of late.” 
    This was also echoed by other experts. The RTI reply revealed that among Maharashtra’s 40 consumer forums, the posts of 34 presidents and 53 members lie vacant. Advocate Uday Wavikar said there were several forums in MMR that had completed stopped functioning because of vacant seats. 
    This, he said, puts burden on forums already dealing with backlog. He said several technicalities introduced in the filing of complaints had made the process tedious. “This further delays case disposal.” 
    Referring to a lack of infrastructure, he said, “The number of forums, even if fully occupied, isnot enough for MMR. While Delhi has 12 consumer forums, Mumbai proper has just four.” 
    An activist said, “There is growing awareness among consumers, especially because of cases being reported in the media. But the forums have not been able to keep up. The situation should be remedied.”  

FILING AN APPEAL 
When the refrigerator sputters and dies down during the guarantee period or when the builder promises more than he can deliver, it’s time to head to the consumer court. Here’s how you can exercise your rights: 
    Write a letter to the manufacturer/ dealer outlining the problem and seeking an explanation 
    If you do not get a reply in 15 days, file a complaint before the district consumer forum. The format is available at the state consumer commission’s office. Attach relevant correspondence, bills and an affidavit 
    Your complaint has to be admitted by the forum within 21 days. The court will then issue notices to the manufacturer/dealer, who has to file a reply in 30 days. A 15-day grace period, too, is given 
    If the forum does not receive a reply, it can hear the matter ex parte and pass orders 
    If you are not satisfied with the forum’s order, you can file an appeal before the state commission and then before the national commission

Source::::: The Times of India, 04-10-2012, p.04. http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW

Compensation can’t be taxed: Consumer court

Rajshri Mehta TNN 

Mumbai: The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has held that damages awarded in a case cannot be equated with income and thus, not liable to attract tax deducted at source. The NCDRC passed the order while directing the Airports Authority of India (AAI) to refund the TDS it had subtracted from the compensation of Rs 2.5 lakh it paid to a couple for the death of their daughter. 
    The NCDRC had on August 5, 2004 directed AAI to pay the Dubai-based complainants Geeta and Parmanand Jethani damages of Rs 2.5 lakh after their daughter Jyotsana died while getting off an escalator maintained by the airport authority. The AAI paid the compensation but only after deducting tax and contended that since the TDS had already been deducted, the Jethanis should seek its refund from the income tax authorities. 
    The commission said that AAI should not have deducted the TDS in the first place. “The AAI should have merely passed on the information to the I-T department. The damages paid for the death of a person cannot be equated with income as such,’’ the bench president Justice J M Malik said. 
    The bench referred to a similar order passed in 2002 wherein it held a consumer not liable to pay TDS on the interest on the amount refunded by the Ghaziabad Development Authority. It held that the interest was paid because of deficiency of services.

Source::::: The Times of India, 03-09-2012, p.01 . http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Client.asp?Daily=TOIM&showST=true&login=default&pub=TOI&Enter=true&Skin=TOINEW