COMMISSION,

REDRESSAL
CONSUMER DISPUTES
STATE U.T., CHANDIGARH

22 of 2024
Complaint case No.
01.04.2024
Date of Institution
20.03.2C25
Date of Decision

Mohar Singh Thakur, aged about

72 years and Smt.
Hira Singh Thakur son of Sh. Hira Singh Thakur, aged about 69 years, New
P/o
Zhavama Thakur wife of Manohar Singh & Co.,
Residency, Singh
Unit SF in The Palm
No.606, General Power of
Attorney Devender
No.606,
140901 through its years, R/o Unit
Chandigarh - aged about 39 Chandigarh, District.
Hira Singh Thakur, Singh & Co., New
Thakur son of Sh.
Residency, Manohar
SF in The Palm 14090:.
Punjab -
...Complainant.

SAS Nagar, Mohali,

Versus
Pvt. Ltd,
Corporate Office:
Constructions
160017 thr¡ugh
& Chandigarh
Sector 17-C,
Infrastructure

Manohar 139-141, signatory.

1. Campus SC C h a i r m a n / A u t h o r i s e d

Office:-Vilage
Manohar
Managing
Director/ Pvt. Ltd, Site
its Director/
Construotions
Punjab through
& Mohali,
Infrastructure
SAS Nagar,
2. Manohar
PGI Road, District
Director/Chairman/Authorised
signatory.
M u l l a n p u r G a r i b d a s ,
Infrastrucure
Manohar
Managing Signatory of SCO 139
its Director/
Singh
Director/Authorized

Office:
Manohar
Campus
Tarninder Corporate
3. Constructions Pvt. Ltd, Infrastructure
& Chandigarh
l60017. Manohar
17-C, Signatory of SCO :39
141, Sector Director
/Authorized
Manohar Campus
Narinderbir Singh Corporate Office:
4. C o n s t r u c t i o n s Pvt.
Ltd,
Manohar
Signatory of
& 160017.
Chandigarh

141, Sector 17-C, Director/Authorized

Office:-
Manohar
Singh Sidhu Ltd,
Corporate
Dhanwant Pvt.
5. &
Constructions
160017.
Sector 3, New
Infrasrucrure Chandigarh
17-C,
139-141, Sector Limited., Site Add;
Campus SCO Mariagement
Private its Director/ Managing
6. Effective Facility Mohali through
SAS Nagar,
Chandigarh,
Director/Chairman/Authorised signatory. ....Opposite Parties

MEMBER
PRESIDING
K. ARYA,
MR. R JESH
BEFORE:
PREETINDER
SINGH, MEMBER
MR.

Argued by: complainants.

Satija, Advocate for the Mehta, Advocate for
Opposite
Sh. Vishal Sh. Anil
Advocate proxy for
Ms. Samridhi Goyal, 6.
Parties No.l to 3, 5
& dated 24.05,2024.
exparte vide order
Opposite Party No.4
PRESIDING MEMBER
ARYA,
PER RAJESH K.

Brief facts: complainants showed

complainants that the
isputes Redressa/ It is the case of the who allTtted
of a house
allotment with the opposite parties,
their inosest for project namely THE
measuring 1560 sq. it., in their
Mane

ctor/

arn indepondent floor,

SE for total sale consideration of 65,50,440/-.
PAMS", Bcw Chandigarh
Howevergallotment was despitevarious requests. Buyers Agreement
issued
NSUMERDISPUTESREDRES ALKOMMiS ION, 05.04.2023
2 8o f
2023

03.01.2024
U.T.,,
CHAT GRH aseNo

month

ivoices
complainantsand
on

beiween the Darties on

21.03.2018 for Unit No.606

confirned
SF
heir
c o

photographs
n d i t i o no f
t h

was exCud
The opposite parties
aforcsaid projcct.
measuring 1560 sq. ft. in the which was got
execLted
convevance decd.
above amount in the
eit of he parties gave physical stated
that the opposite
4 )

27.03.2O18, lt has been stated obtaining the

on letter and witnout
without possession
OSsessioN of the flat,
Rosh which
authnority, Sur

Irom the comnpetent

and Construetion
S o
S h .

CONiplction and
oCCUpational ccrti•icatc

settled proposition of law

that the possession cannoL be
ahore
isin contravention of
also
obtaining these certificates.
The complainants have
handed over without are
of the buyers agreemnent
alleged that the most of
the terms and conditions
and against their interest.
It
favoring the opposite parties
one sided and totally conditions of the draft
maintenance
stated that the
has further been
alongwith the buyers
complainant on 21.03.2018
agreement, signed by the has not been
final maintenance agreement
agreement, are also one sided and
there is no independent
till date. It has further been stated that
executed
provided by the opposite
[Link] arrangement for power
backup and the backup
area of the
the common
Sector PSPCL meters installed in
parties is linked to
mneter installed and
stated that there is no water
2. Manc

buildings. It has further been

such, the water facility is not proper.
Dis

no water treatment plant exists as

complainant's unit is a corner
2] It has further been stated that the
the
deed i.. towards the north, there is
flat as mentioned in the conveyanCÇ
there is 40 feet road; towards the
unit of the complainants; towards the south,
west, there is Floor No.629. It
east, there is again 40 feet road and towards the
with malafide intentions have
has further been stated that the opposite parties
left open the iron bars towards the south side and when the complainants
approached the opposite parties to remove those iron bars, they kept
the
A
stated that due
oV

matter pending on one pretext or the other. It has further been

pro to dew and rain, the iron bars have caught rust, which might have affected the
building as well. It has further been stated that now the opposite parties have
started constructing another building right after the road and the
complainants have strong assumption and presumption that they are
planning to cover the road by joining the building towards south side of the
unit. The complainants also placed on record inspection eport dated
02.02.2024 of Block A of the Housing Project The Palm' Manohar Singh Infra
- & Co., Sector 3, New Chandigarh, Mullanpur, Mohali (Punjab), Annexure C-8,
where the flat of the complainants is located, which they got prepared from
Karmti Architects + Designers, showing various deficiencies
1, amenities.
and lack of basic
3
t has further been stated that opposite party
No.6 - Effective
inaclility: Management Private Limited has
U.I been raising illegal demands iae
ait No.606 SF
s confirned

xecLt
sica ed

ir invoices on monthly basis as there is no agreement executed between the

onplainants and opposite party No.6. It has further been stazed that the
condition of the flat in question and the project is very poor as shown in
photographs, Annexure C-6 (Colly.).
41 It has further been stated that not only the basic amenities
as
stated in the Brochure are not available but there is no one to look after the
surroundings of the area as there is no proper security at the site. It has
further been stated that the opposite parties have delivered the possessioa of
the unit in jungle without obtaining the requisite completion certificate and
permissions/approvals from the competent authority.
Relief sought by the complainants:
deficiency in
5] Alleging the aforesaid acts of the opposite parties as
rendering service and unfair trade practice on their
part, the complainants
the opposite parties to
have filed the present complaint seeking directions to
of 65,50,440/- from the
pay interest @18% p.a. on the deposited amount
opposite parties obtain the
date of possession i.e. 27.03.2018 till the
authority; provide
completion and occupational certificate from the competernt
maintenance services as promised and agreed in
the
all facilities and
maintenance charges till the issuance
maintenance agreement; waive the fixed
opposite parties to construct the
of final completion certificate; restrain the
further restrain them to cover the
floor adjoining to the complainant's unit;
cut the iron rods which are left
road towards south of the unit No.606 TF:
conditions of the agreement and maintenance
open; declare terms and
Lakhs for mental agony, physical
agreement as nfair; pay compensation of 5
harassment, financial loss; pay 1 Lakh as
cost of litigation besides awarding
deems fit in the facts and
any other relief, whicl1 this Commission
círcumnstances of the case.

Written version of Opposite Parties No.1 to 3, 5 & 6:

6] The claim of the complainants has been contested by opposite
version, wherein number
parties No.1 to 3, 5 &6, by way of filing joint written
of objections were taken as under:
that this Commission is not vested with pecuniary
().
jurisdiction to entertain this complaint as the amount of
demand qua maintenance charges disputed by the
pisputes
Redres a! complainants is lesser than the prescribed pecuniary limit
of this Commission;
that this Commission is not vested with territorial
jurisdiction to entertain this complaint as the project cf the
 W eh a v eh

case

the
themvery
caref
opposite partics i.c. The Palms falls
jurisdiction ofSAS Nagar, Punjab;
within the territozial
Observation
record
o f

(iii). that the complaint is timne barred as

silent for 7 years;
the complainants kept Pecuniar
(iv). that the terms and conditions of the agreements have
been
approved by the RERA, as such, the complainants cannot 12]

dispute the same before this ommission: o P

7] On merits, it has been stated that the project is at the verge of

completion; that application for sanction of the project in question was mcved
by the opposite parties on 12.09.201 1 with the Competent Authorities; that
signed
the project was approved on 22.03.2013 and the fornmal agreement was
land
with the Government of Punjab on 14.06.2013: that thereafter some more
was added to the project, for which completion period was givern upto
16.06.2016 executed with
13.06.2018, vide suppiementary agreement dated
provis:ons
the Government; that later on, exemption from the applËcability of
1995, (PAPR Act) scood
of the Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act,
Competent Authority has
granted by the Government on 25.01.2017; that the
31.12.2022; that all the
granted extension for completion of the project upto
basic amenities such as sewerage, water, electricity, metalled road

connectivity etc. have been provided at the project site. However, it has
been
fairly admitted by the opposite parties in Para No.21 of preliminary
submissions that they have already applied for partial completion certificate
for which the Competent Authorities are taking considerable time for issuance
of the same. The complainants are being charged for maintenance charges for
the services provided to them at the project site. The authentication of the
report, got prepared by the complainants, has been disputed by these oppósite
parties as the same was prepared in the absence of any of the representative
of the opposite parties. Remaining averments of the complaint have been
denied being wrong.
Opposite party no,4 exparte:
8 Despite service, none put in appearance on
behalf of opposite
party no.4 - Sh. Narinderbir Singh, as a
re_ult whereof, he was proceeded
aragainst exparte vide order dated 24.05.2024.
Rejoinder filed by the comnplainants:
9] In the rejoinder filed, the
contained in their complaint and complainants reiterated the averments
Teply of Pposite parties No.1 controverted those contained in the
to 3, 5 & 6. written
.1, The parties led evidence in
support of their cases and
arguments/submissions. also filed
11] We have heard the contesting parties and have gone through the
mwd of he cases including the
written arguments/submissions filed by
them vey tarefully.

Observations/ findings of this Commission:

Pecuniary jurisdiction:
12] First, we will deal with the objection taken by the
contesting
opposite parties with rrgard to pecuniary jurisdiction of this Conmission, it
mar be stated here that the provisions of Section 47 of Consumer Protection
Act. 2019 (under which these complaints have been filed) speak about the
iunsdiction of this Commission. It is necessary to reproduce relevant
provisionsof Section 47 of CPA 2019 as under:
.47. (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the State
Commission shall have jurisdiction
(a) to entertain

complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as

consideration, exceeds rupees one crore, but does not exceed
rupees ten crore: Provided that where the Central
Government deems it necessary so to do, t may prescribe
such other value, as it deems fit;
() complaints against unfair contracts, where the value of goods
or services paid as consideration does not exceed ten crore
rupees; appeals against the orders of any District
Commission within the State...
(i)
A bare perusal of Section 47 (1) (a) (i) provides that the State Commission
shall also have the jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaints ageinst
unfair contracts, where the value of goods or services paid as consideration
does not exceed ten crore rupees, (pecuniary jurisdiction of State Commnission
has now been decreased to rupees two crores vide Consumer Protection

Jurisdiction of the District Commission, the State Commission and the

National Comnission) Rules, 2021 dated 30.12.2021. Definition of "unfair
contract has been provided under Clause 2 (46) of CPA 2019 as under:
(46) "unfair contract" means a contract between a manufacturer or
trader or service provider on one hand, and a consumer or. the
other, having such terms which cause significant change ir the
rights of such consumer, including the following, namely:
() requiring manifestly excessive security deposits to be given by a
isputes Redressa/ consumer for the performance of contractual obligations; or
posing any penalty on the consumer, for the breach of contract
thereof which is wholly disproportionate to the loss occurred due to
sileh breach to the other party to the contract; or

fi) tefusing to accept early repayment of debts on payment of

qpdlicable penalty; or
 C
of

amounts toeffect
(

(46)
v i )

to the COntract to terminate such Contract

Terateiu, *i11
2
ection
yosonable Cause;
d e t r i m e n t
o f
t h

0r
teo t /re t of uponthem
irtinent permittirng to assign the
(v)
or
imposng oi the
consumer any
of the other party one
who
P
onsurner disadvant
condition which puts unreasonable
such consumer charge, obligtion
In the present to disadvantage. ( v io
) f
C

case, admittedly, the

various terms and complainants have
specifically challenged case

conditions mentioned in
maintenance the
agreements, meaning thereby that respective buyer's and
pecuniary jurisdiction, this for determination of
or services paid Commission has to see that the value of the goods
as consideration
should not exceed rupees
Furthermore, we have also gone through two Crcres.
the terms and condEtions
respective agreements and are of the of the
one sided, harsh, oppressive
considered opinion that the same are
and unconscionable to the
per clause 2.7 of the agreement in complainants like as
case there is delay in making
respeCt of the unit in question, the opposite payment in
parties can charge interest @18%
p.a. On the unpaid amount but at the
same time, as per clause 2.10 in case
there is any excess amount received by the opposite
parties and the same is
refundable on account of decrease in area of the
unit, the same will be
refunded by the opposite parties
alongwith meager interes- @6% p.a.
Similarly, as per clause 2.21 of the said
agreement, consent has been thrust
upon the complainants qua electricity tariff/
power backup. In clause 2.24 the
opposite parties agreed that price of the unit includes
fire detection and
fighting equipments but in clause 2.25 it-has been mentioned
that if required
the cost of firefighting or preventive measures in the
common areas within the
project will be borne by allottees. Similarly, clause 4.1
pertains to completion
certificate, yet, application for applying the said certificate has been mentioned
as date of completion of construction, which is in
contravention of clause
no.2.10. Clause no.4.2 says that possession of the unit will be delivered in
the
specified period with grace period, yet, no penalty clause has been
incorporated in case there is delay on the part of the opposite parties in
delivery of possession. Similarly, there are number of other clauses/condiions
plconlgiped ín the respective agreements, which are one sided, harsh,
oppressive and unconscionable. In our considered opinion, the act of
thrusting- the said one sided, harsh, oppressive and unconscionable
nditions" wpon the complainants, amounts to imnposing
upon the
oOnplainants unreasonable charge, obligation and condition
put which had
er to disadvantage. The case of the
complainants, thus, fall under
 Section 2(46) (vì) of CPA 2019, This act and conduct of opposite parties also
amounts to effect of permitting them to assign the contract to the
detriment of the complainants, without their consent and also imposing
upon them unreasonable charge, obligation and condition to put themto
disadvantage, which is covered under the provisions of Section 2 (46) (v) and
(vi) of CPA 2019, which gives reason to this Commission to say that it was a
case of unfair contract'. In this view of the matter,objection taker:. by opposite
parties No.l to 3, 5 & 6 regarding pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission
stands rejected and it is held that this complaint is maintainable under

Section (2) 46 and 47 (1) (a) (iü) of CPA 2019.

Territorial Jurisdiction:
by opposite parties No.1
13] Now we will deal with the objection taken
Commission did not vest with
territcrial
to 3. 5 & 6 to the effect that this
settléd
jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.
It may be stated here thar it is
cause of action will be part of the
law that even an infinitesimal fraction of a
Court/Tribunal/Commission
jurisdiction on the
cause of action and confer
case, this
which that ccurs. In the instant
within the territorial limits of
because the buyers
Commission is vested with territorial jurisdiction
complainants have
agreenment qua the unit of the
agreenent and maintenance
located at SCO
executed at Registered Office of the opposite parties
been
only as above, it is
Sector 17-C, Chandigarh. Not
Nos. 139-141, First Floor,
198 of the file)
dated 15.03.2024 (at Page
further evident from letter Technical
parties and National Institute of
exchanged between the opposite
same was
Sector 26, Chandigarh that the
Teachers Training and Research,
opposite parties located at SCO
Nos. :39
addressed to Registered Office of the
was
meaning thereby that the Company
141, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh, Offices at
carrying on business from ts
actuallyand voluntaríly residing and
Chandigarh has territorial jurisdiction
Chandigarh. Thus, this Commi_sion at to 3,
taken by, the opposite parties No. 1
toentertain this complaint. Objection
rejected.
5&6 in this regard stands
Possession delivered was valid and legal or not:
whether,
for consideration is, as to
Now the question which falls
14] opposite parties No. 1 to 3, 5
8
offered and delivered by
the possession of unit stated here tha Counsel for
possession or not? It may be
6wasyalid and legal
though
còntended with vehemence that
the çöplainants has specifically complainants, yet, the said
unit has been taken over by the
possession of the
possession because possession
letter was
nothing but a paper
possession was
parties No.1 to 3, 5 .8& 6
have the reqcisite
aevet issuéd/ nor opposite
promised
completion certificates nor the basic amenities as
.OCcupatiog gnd
 1ie hurr and also at the time of booking of the said units we
under
at the project site but possession was takern over
isavantageous osition, As failure to take over the sarme was to entail
penal, hoding charges cte.
1s] On the other hand, counscl
for the opposite parties No.1
b ontended with to Þ, O
vehemence that possession of the unit was
offered and
delivered after providing all the basic amenities at the project site.
16] It is significant to mention here that the opposite
parties in clause
no.4.1 of the agreement have clearly promised to deliver
possession and
Cxecute sale deed in respect of the unit in question, after
obtaining occupaion
and completion certificates. Relevant part of the said
clause is reproduced
hereunder:
.The Company shall, before execution and registration of the
Deed of the Said Independernt Floor to the Allottee(s),
the Competent Authority, the necessary occupation obtain jrom
completion certificates in respect of the Said Building and/ or
Said Independent Floor is situated towards in which the
Construction, as may be required under the ApplicableCompletion
Law.
of

17] However, at the time of arguments, when we

put a query to
counsel for the opposite parties No. 1to 3,
5&6 as to where is occupation and
completion certificate, he was having no valid answer to
it. On the other hand,
he tried to wriggle out of the situation by
stating that though the company has
applied for partial completion certificate, yet,
the competent Authority is
delaying the same. In other words, it has
been candidly admitted by the
opposite parties No. 1 to 3, 5 & 6 that till the
date of arguments even, no
Occupation and completion certificates have been
obtained qua he unit and
project in question.
18] It is significant to mention here that an
occupation certificate is a
legal document that authorizes the construction of
the building in the eyes of
the law. It certifies that the building
plan is in accordance with the
construction laws approved by the concerned authorities, and the
place is fit
to be occupied. Without an Occupancy
Certificate, a builder cannot guarantee
basic civil amenities. Thus, obtaining an
Occupancy Certificate is important
before noving into a place to eliminate the risk of
lawful eviction and
9:spuler
deaolition, which the opposite parties have admittedly not obtained. Similarly,
cohpletiÍn certificate is also a vital document issued by the
Government
( Authugieg to signify the successful
completion of a building construstion
ncluding the basic amenities. It also serves as formal
proof that the buiding
been tonstructed according to approved plans,
codes, ajety regulations, and quality adhering to all building
standards. The issuance of a Completion
U.T. Chandiga
 Certificateinvolves a comprehensive
Ae such, in the inspection of the
absence of these buildings/project site.
certificates, the builder/developer
claim that the project is
ready for occupation of cannot
section 14 of Punjab the residents.
Apartment and Property Similarly,
"PAPRA") also deals with Regulation Act, 1995 (in shTrt,
completion and occupation responsibility of the builder/promoter to obtain
reads as under: certificates from the competent
authYrity, which
14. It is the
responsibility of the promoter
)in the case of
do so under anyapartments, to obtain from the
lawcompletion and occupationauthority
building and if a promoter,
required to
certificates for the
within a
construction of the building,' does notreasonable time, after the
certificate from the aforesaid authority; apply for ar. occupation
may apply for an occupation certificate from the allottee of an apartment
the said authority; and
(ü) in the case of a colony, to obtain
competent authority to the effect thatcompletion certificate from the
the development works have
been completed in all aspects as per
licence granted to him under section [Link] (2) The
and conditions of the
in sub-section (1) shall, after satisfying authority referred to
sale between the promoter and the itself about the agreement of
the building regulations and all other allottee, and the compliance of
oçcupation certificate." formalities, issue an
It is significant to mention here that the
candid admission of oppTsite pa ties
No.1 to 3, 5 &6 in their written version to the
effect that they have applied for
partial completion certificate for which the
Competent Authorities are taking
considerable time for issuance of the sane is
sufficient to hold that they are
not in possession of occupation and
completion certificates. Thus, under these
circumstances, the mere fact that the complainants have
been delivered
possession of their unit, in the absence of
occupation and completion
certificates, in no way, can be termed as genuine offer of
possessiTn. Our this
view is supported by the observations
made by the Hon'ble National
Commission in Shri Rajeev Nohwar&Anr. Versus M/s
Sahajanand HI TECH
Construction Pvt. Ltd., Consumer Case No. 346 of 2014,
decide on 06 May
2016, wherein, it was held as under:
..... .The date' by which the flat was
of fitouts cannot be said to be the to be offered for the purpose
date for handing over the
possession to the purchaser since neither the builder is under an
Gispates
Redressa/ obligation to complete the construction in all
or can the purchaser occupy the
respect by that date
Section (2) () of MOFA mandatesflattheat promotor
the stage of offer offitcuts.
not to allow any
Dersons to enter into possession until a completion certificate is
huty given by the authorities. It also mandates the purchaser rot to
tghe possession of a flat until such completion certificate has been
dyly given. Therefore, the date on which the flat is made available
f fitouts cannot be said to be the date for delivery of possession of
Chant he flat. Such a date, by law, cannot be a date earlier than the date
 is issued
certificate
yhic the ompietion certificate/occtupancy
Thr n be Natonel
Commission in its order dated 13.06..2018 passed in
Nst Aeal No 853 of 2018 (Vision India Realtors Pyt.
Ltd. &Anr. V. San o
MaiIR) als), Cntgorically held that
legal possession cannot be
the abscnce of complction delivered
certificate issucd by the competent
authority. It was
held in Para No.5 as follows:
5. Durng the course of hearing, it was submitted by the
counsel for the appellant that the completion certificate learned
the projet was obtined by the appellant on in respect of
the communication dated 15.03.2016 from 15.03.2016. A cory of
Kharar has been placed on record. t is therefore, Municipal Council,
evident that the
completion certificate having been received only on 15.03.2016, the
appellant could not have offered legal possession of the
to the complainant at any time before that date. As rotedapartrnent
the amount of Rs. 1,81,375/- was demanded on 20.04.2015
earlier,
the amount of Rs.2, 12,489/- was demanded on and
06.C2.2016. The
complainant waS requested to pay the aforesaid amount so that the
appellant could offer the possession of the flat. The said offer of
possession was meaningless being unlawful as the requisite
completion certifcate had not been obtained by that date. .....

It is, therefore, held that by offering

and delivering possession of the unit, in
the absence of occupation and
completion certificates, opposite parties No. 1 to
3, 5 & 6 are deficient in providing
service and also adopted unfair trade
practice, out of which, they cannot claim any
that the possession so offered and
immunity. It is, therefore, held
delivered to the complainants is not a valid
and legal possession.
Basic amenities/ facilities at the project
site:
19] Before adjudicating the controversy as to
whether the amenities
nentioned in the brochure have been
provided or not, it may be stated here
that it is necessary to discuss
about the importance of brochure. It
stated here that it is settled law that may be
brochure is part of the promise, on which
the ontract is based and
therefore, promises made therein could
overridden or prevailed by any subsequernt not be
contract because it is based on
such alluring promises given by the
builder vide the brochure only that the
buyers enters into the contract for
this view is supported by the
purchasing units/ plots in the project. Our
observations made by the Hon'ble National
-Coxomission in Brig. (Retd.) Kamal Sood
vs M/s. DLF Universal
ApiY 2007, FA No.557 of 2Q03. Ltd. on 20
the lHoyye National Importance of brochure was also
discussed by
Ld. andang on 5 Comnission in Yash Pal Marwaha vs Pushpa
s sai beeju fered September, 2005, wherein despite the fact Buiiders
and sale deed was that possession
neniuespromised in the brochure als0 executed, even then,
were not provided to because the
the buyer, the
 Nnlder was ordered to refund the amount paid alongwith interest to the
ppmplainant. InWg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Khan and Aleya Sultana and Jrs
Versus DLF Southem Homes Pvt, Ltd. Civil Appeal No, 6239 of 2019,decided
on 24.08.2020 also, the Hon ble Supreme Court of India held that since the
amenities as provided in the brochure have not been made ava:lable at the
project site, as such, the complainant therein is entitled to compensatior. by
war of interest and also the penalty clause as provided in the agreement.
20] In order to move ahcad, it is nccessary to reproduce the relevant
contents of the Brochure, Annexure P-7, which reveals that the oppcsite
parties had promised following basic amenities and facilities to be provide at.
the project site:
(). Sports and recreational facilities
(ii). 24 x7 security
(ii). Modern medical facilities
(iv). Dedicated and ample parking;
(). Playway school
(vi). High school
(vi). Dispensary/healthcare
(vii). Temple
(ix). Gurudwara
(x). Police post
(xi). Commercial centre/shopping malls
(xii). Utility market
(xiüi). Club house (A Ten Acre Paradise)
(xiv). Football Ground
(xv). Swimming Pool
(xvi). Banquet Hall
(xvii). Hockey Ground
(xvii). Fully Equipped Gym
(xix). Kitty Party Hall
(xx). Lawn Tennis Court
(xxi). Cricket Pitch
(xxii). Badminton Courts
(xxii). Carom/Billards Room
(xxiv). Bar and Restaurant
(xxv). Basket Ball Court
(xxvi).. Table Tennis Room
(xxvi). Library
(xxviil). Running Track
(oxix). Card Roomn

21] Though to justify the stand of the opposite parties that all the
amenities and facilities have been provided at the project site, Counsel fo: the
opposite parties No. 1to 3, 5 &6 contended with vehemence that all the basic
nisaetes
arnehitie as promised at the time of booking of the unit, stood provided at the
project site, yet, in our considered opinion this contention is of no help foz the
(reasons recórded hereinafter.
221 There is nothing on record to establish that all the basic amerities
as promised yide brochure Annexure P-7 i.e. Playway School, High School
Chans
 co

coloredphotograph
t h e

Dispensary/ healthcare, Club house A Ten Acre Paradise), Swimmng from

charged
Pool, Banquet Hall, Fully Equipped Gym, Kitty Party Hall, Cricke [Link] o f
Basket g
Badminton Courts, Carom/Billiards Room, Bar and Restaurant, by

Ball Court, Table Tennis been record

Room, Library, Card Room have still pendin
provided at the project site. on

c e d

still surTOL
23] 1t 1s also apposite to mention here that alongwith the complall l, is
rk manne
i t s

the complainants also moved a Miscellaneous Application No.330 of also

2043 i n o

re

seeking direction to the opposite parties to place on record all the requs i
i n

ireFightin
in
t h e

permission and approvals from the competent authority pertaining to tne i s ,

project such like CLU, License, approval of layouts from CTP, NOCs rom 2 6

photos
]

PSPCL, Highway, Environmental Department, Forest Department, Completion 1 5

Certificate, NDC from GMADA towards payment of charges and all other
permission and approvals. Opposite Parties No.1 to 3, 5 &% 6 contested the said
application by filing their reply, wherein, they stated that the complainants
had been enjoying the amenities since the very beginning and the provisions of
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 does not empower the complainants to seek
such directions from this Commission.
24] During the pendency of this complaint i.e. on 27.09.2024, this
Commission directed opposite parties No.1 to 3, 5 & 6 to place on record the
present status of the site where the house of the complainants is situated
alongwith photographs and also place on record information by way of
affidavit of their responsible officer as to whether the STP is

working/operational there or not; water supply is also being provided or not

and status regarding club house. However, when opposite parties No.1 to 3, 5
&[Link] not submit the report, again direction was reiterated on 28.10.2024 to
opposite parties No.1 to 3, 5 &6 to comply with the order and place on resord
the requisite status of the project.
25] In pursuance to our directions, the authorized signatory of
opposite parties No.1 to 3, 5 & 6 filed an affidavit dated 18.12.2024 annexing
therewith Assessment and Inspection Report dated 15.03.2024 pertaining to
execution works in respect of residential & commercial plotted Development
Project «The Palm', Sector - 3 & 16, New Chandigarh, Distt, Mohali, Punjab
issued by National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research
S0RIRSector 26, Chandigarh. In the said affidavit in Para 2, it has been
as per the report of NITTTR, Sewage Treatment Plan: is installed
endfundtionhl and water supply pipelines have already been laid at the site.
BUther, nPara No.3 of theaffidavit, it has been testified that the Club House
hot fllytnctional and some amenities of the Club are being provided. It is
further ¢sified that monthly charges pertaining to the club facility are not
 ty
Hal, ar disel, Swim ing
mhaye stl
Restaurnt, CricketBasket Pitch,
be n
aol ain
house. Alongwith the affidavit,
being charged from the complainants qua club
complainants have also been
few colored photographs of the flat of the
anncxed. Perusal of photographs of the unit and the surrourding areas,
development
placed on record by both the parties, which show that lot of
located
work is still pending within the building where the unit in question is
visible
and also its surrounding. Unfinished roads, mud rocks etc. are clearly
to be habitable. Not only
and in no manner the project/buildings could be said
stated that there is no irstallation of
this, in the report of NITTTR, it is clearly
Fire Fghting.
Report of NITTTR and
26] Though it is also coming out from the
photographs placed on record by opposite parties
No.1 to 3, 5 &¬ that STP of
sewerage pipe
150 KLDcapacity is installed at site and is functional and the
the main STP of 2
lines are laid in the total area proposed for completion and
MLD capacity for fulfilling the' total project requirement is proposed in the
project layout yet no benefit can be given to opposite parties No.l to 3, 5 & 6
in the matter, especially, when it is a proved case that they have failed to
obtain occupation and completion certificates even till the date of final
arguments. It may also be stated here that no doubt, the inspection report
dated 02.02.2024, Annexure C-8, which was prepared by independent
Architects & Designers on behalf of the complainants, was prepared without
parties but it is a
accompanying any authorized representative of the opposite
deficiencies are still
fact that still umpteen basic amenities are still lacking,
there at the site where the flat of the complainants is situated, which they got
and
prepared from Kamti Architects + Designers, showing various deficiencies
lack of basic amenities at the site. Thus, by not providing all the tasic
armenities as promised vide brochure and agreements, referred to above and
on the other hand, forcing the complainants to take over possession and pay

huge maintenance charges, opposite parties No.l to 3, 5 & 6 indulged into

unfair trade practice and are also deficient and negligent in providing service.
-141,
Maintenance charges:
Signator whether,
27] The next question thai falls for consideration is, as to
charges in the absence of
the opposite parties can charge maintenance
amenities, referred to
Qccupation and completion certificates and also basic
possession of
eS Mefbgy, not, irrespective of the fact that the complainants are in
theiryft may be stated here that asimilar question
fell before the Hon'ble
Reddy R&Ors. Vs
Nationaommission in the case titled as Madhusudhan
Consumer Case No.
RB Whiteld Development Private Limited & 2 Ors.,
decided in avour of the
63 of20R0:decided on 25 Jan 2022, which has been
buyesfopplainant while holding as under:
 n5.04

nanife
t h ep r

re
2pleti 1 4

2 0

comp
betweer
Ovear f t

.Regarding the issue of maintenance charges, it is fact that, the wa

Complainants have taken phusical possession of their respectue ithe
sao l

units, h wouid be logical that, there would be expense on the

maimtenance of certain common services. It is also a fact thal, re o
fer

refuso
CCOaNCY Certiiicate has not been
project is not yet fully complete andobtained
that not
uet. It means that the
al1 services promise
ac

are beiNg provided. As per the Order

Kishore &Anr. of this Commnission in Kanau
Versus M/s. Supertech Limited
maintenance charge should be (Supra),
levied before obtaining No
Occupancy Certificate. In this case, even of some the
of the allottees
inchuding the Complainants, have taken possession of their
respective Units, it would be considered as paper possession only.
So, the question of charging maintenance charge is
in our
considered view not proper and therefore should not have teen
collected and should not be collected till receipt of the
Occupancy
Certificate. The Complainants will be liable to pay maintenance
charge only after the Occupancy Certificate is received.
In view of the discussion above, the Consumer Complaint
is partly
allowed. The Opposite Parties are directed to:
(1) Complete the construction of the flats allotted to the
Complainants in all respects, duly obtaining the requisite
Occupancy certificate at its own cost and responsibility and
offer and give legal possession of the respective Flats to the
Complainants within 3 months of the receipt of this Order.
(2) Pay delay Compensation to the Complainants @ 9 % per
annun from proposed date of possession, which would
include grace period as per their respective agreement on
the amount deposited, till obtaining Occupancy Certificate
within a period of six weeks. In case of delay beyond this
perio, the delay compensation will be @ 12% per annum.
(3) Not to collect any maintenance charge till the receipt of
Occupancy Certificate. The advance maintenance charge as
given in clause 14.5 of the Construction Agreement and any
other maintenance charges so far collected should be
adjusted towards the maintenance charge to be paid by the
Complainants post receipt of Occupancy Certificate...
Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble National Commission in Kamal Kishore
sAnT. Versus M/s. Supertech Limited, Consumer Case No. 1009 of 2016,
decided on 14 March, 2017
As stated earlier, the possession in my view could not have
been offered to the allottee without completing the constructicn of
the villa in all respects and obtaining the requisite ccupancy
certificate. offering possession without obtaining the occupancy
certificate is meaningless sirnce the allottee is not permitted in law
to occupy the house which does not have the requisite occupancy
certificate. Therefore, the maintenance charges, in my opinion,
gisputes gedressa/ would be payable only from the date on which the possession is
offered to the complainants, after obtaining the requisite occupancy
certificate and provided the construction of the villa complete in all
pspects at that time...
Cdr.Ràioalan and ors Vs Vatika LËmited, IV (2O23) CPJ 127
Süniar vie was reiterated by the Hon'ble National (NC) also,
of which1ie eproduced hereunder: Comnmission, relevant part
 tthe

the Spectw 1e

delayed the
"...14. It is manifest that the opposite party has be handed
promised to
completion of the project. The flats were possession was made
offer of
Over after three years. Howeve, the admittedly there was
between 2014 to 2016/2017 on which date
Department. The possession
neither an 0C nor an NOC of the Fire in case of
financial penalty
offered was also linked to further no option but to
refusal and hence the complainants
were left with
absence of the OC and the
accept the possession. However,
in the
construed tò be a paper
NOC, the possession can only be service. In view of the
deficiency in
possession which constitutes Country
0C and NOC from the Town and
admitted fact that the Department respectively
Services
PlanningDerartment and the Fire liable to
26.03.2015, the opposite partu is
were obtained only on terms of the FBA for the delay and
compensate the complainants in lega! clearanes.
without the necessary
for the possession that was complainants .was merely a paper
Possession taken by the
possession in view of Kamal
Kishore (supra) and therefore such
holding or maintenance charges
alottees are not liable to pay any
tll 26.03.2015....*
Commission in
Though the ratio of law laid down
by the Hon'ble National

Kamal Kishore &sAnr., Madhusudhan Reddy

R&0rs. and [Link] and
yet, this
applicable to the present cases also,
orscases (supra) is squarely
have
fact that the opposite parties
Commission also cannot lose sight of the
functional at the
has also been made
now made some parks, roads and STP
complainants/other occupants of the
used by the
project site, which is being maintenance etc. in order to
definitely need regular
project and the same will
are borne by the
done only if some charges
the same, which could be
maintain the
circumstances, considering
complainants/other occupants. Under these
direct the
natural justice and fair play & equity, if we
principles of extent of 30%
of maintenance charges to the
complainants to make payment
justice. At the same tme,
opposite party no.6 that will meet the ends of
only to also
the electricity charges and
for
the comnplainants shall also be liable to pay
agreement), to the extent
charges are applicable as per
water charges-(if water
project site. However, it
is also made
used by them at the
the same is being any, stood received
by the
maintenance charges, if
clear that the entire deduction) towards the
adjusted (without any
shall be
opposite parties, post receip: of
be paid by the complainants
maintenance charges to
certificates.
OcCupancy and completion
Limitation:
opposite parties No. l
to 3, 5 & 6 that
taken by
As far as objection by the complainants
281 been taken over
isputes Snceosession of the unit has already complaint is barred
has been executed,
as such, now this
alÇ deed bereft
iard also that this objection is
it
concerned, may be stated here
is
limitai law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the
merit in i¢w of ratio of Ltd, v. Mumbai
Mahalaxmi
Housing Society
Samruddhi Coop.
Case titleg as
U.T. Chandiga
 COMMISSION,
REDRESSAL
NISPUTES
VER

continuous

held that
SCC 103, wherein, it was
Construction (P) Ltd.. (2022) 4 therefore,
continuing wrong,
certificate is
failurr to obtain occupancy the said
Relevant par: of
barred by limitation.
Omplaint cannot be said to be
rder is rrprodced hereunder:

.Based on these provisions, it is evident that there was a

certificate
obligation on the respondent to provide the occupancy
certificate has been
and pay for the relevant charges till the failed tc provide the
provided. The respondent has time and again
occupancy certificate to the appellant society. For this reason,
a
complaint was instituted in 1998 by the appellant against the
respondent. The NCDRC on 20 August 2014 directed the
respondent to obtain the cetificate within a period of four months.
Purther, the NCDRC also imposed a penalty for any the delay in
obtaining the occupancy certificate beyond these 4 months. Since
2014 till date, the respondent has failed to provide the occupancy
certifcate. Owing to the faiire of the respondent to obtain the
certificate, there has been a direct impact on the members of the
appellant in terns of the payment of higher taxes and water
charges to the municipal authority. This continuous faiture to obzain
an occupancy certificate is a breach of the obligations imposed on
the respondent under the MOFA and amounts to a continuing
wrong. The appellants therefore, are entitled todamages arising out
of this continuing wrong and their complaint is not barred by
limitation..
29] In the present case also, it has already been held by his
Commission that possession of the unit, so delivered to the complainants was
not a valid and legal possession and opposite parties No. 1 to 3, 5 & 6 are
iable to obtain occupation and completion certificates from the compezent
authorities which they committed vide clause no.4.1 of the buyer agreement,
but have failed to obtain the same till the date, arguments were keard inthis
complaint. As such, the act of opposite parties No. 1 to 3, 5 & 6 of continuous
faikure to obtain occupation and completion certificates is a breach of the
obligations under the agreement and amounts to a continuing wrong and
therefore, there a continuing cause of action in favour of the complainants
Lo fle this complaint in view of ratio of law laid down in Samruddhi Coop.
Housing Society Ltd, case (supra). Thus, objection taken in this regard stands
rejected.
30] Not only as above, this plea taken by opposite parties No.1 to 3, 5
6Ís also devoid of merit, in view of principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble
Suprefgg Court in the case of Debashis Sinha v/s M/S R.N.R Enterprise, Civil
: Appeal No.8343 of 2020February 9, 2023, wherein it was held that the mere
fact that: possession has been taken over by the consumer and sale deed has
claim the services promised by
,peern regisyed, cannot forfeits his/her right to
the projeoBroponent.
iandiy
 Oeen iron bars on the outer wall of the unit in question being corner one.

31) Now coming to the averment of the complainants that their unit is
acormer flat and the opposite parties, with malafide intent, have left iron bars
open on the south side and over time, the iron bars have rusted, potentially
afrecting the building. The complainants have requested that the opposite
parties be dircted to cut those iron bars so that there should not be any
senaSe or threat to the building. In our considered opinion, leaving
the iron
bars on the omer outer wall of the building presents significant risks,
particulary in termms of water ingress. The prcsence of these iron bars on the
structure to the
Cxternal wall, especially in a corner location, exposes the
Rainwater
ptential of water penetration, particularly during rainy seasons.
can seep through the rusted iron bars leading to the accumulation of moisture
in the lintel arnd other parts of the wall, which could cause structural damage
over tinme. This seepage can weaken the building's integrity, lead to corrosion,
and potentially cause long-term damage to the materials of the wall, makirg it
prone to further deterioration. In our concerted view, it is crucial that the ron
bars be removed immediately to prevent any adverse effects on tte building's

structural safety.
Compainant's concern of encroaching the road adjoining their flat by the
opposite parties.

32] As regards the concern of the complainants that since the

opposite parties areconstructing a new building nearby, possibly intending to
cOver the road by linking it to the south side of the complainant's unit, it may
be stated here that this suspicion of the complainants is based on mere
hearsay. Still, we observe that the opposite parties shal strictly abide by their
layout of construction.
Compensation payable by the opposite parties:

33] Now the question arises, as to what compensation should be

state here that
granted to the complainants in this case? It may be
rights. This
Consumer Protectíon Act has been made to safeguard consumer
subject to the law, even the
Act is regarded as the 'Magna carta' (everyone is
Icing, and guarantees the rights of individuals,
the right to justice and the right
protection for checking unfair trade
to4 fair trial) in the field of consumer
yispstes and it works and
'defects in goods' and 'deficiencies in services'
rights.
pyotectíonsumers even in situations where they do not know their
proide
34] n n the present case, failure of the opposite parties to
absence of occupation and
e9ipleteçlective possession of the unit i.e. in the
amenities referred to above, amounts to
o completion/certificates and also basic
Cüzndigas
 deficiency in service and in no manner it can be said that the possession O
offered and delivered to the complainants is valid and legal and on the ouio
hand, it can casily be said to be a paper possession. In the case titled aS
Lucknow Devclopment Authority v, MK Gupta (1994) 1 SCC
Supreme Court discussed about the cxtent 243, the Hon'ble
of the iurisdiction of the
Fora to award just and rcasonable Consuner
compensation for the harassment and
agony suffered by a consumer. In DLF Homes Panchkula Pt. Ltd. Versus
Hìmanshu Arora, Civil Appeal No. 11097 of 2018, decided on 19 November,
2018 under similar cicumstances, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has
upheld the order of the Hon'ble National Commission awarding interest @9%
p.a. for the period of delay in delivery of actual physical possession. Thereafter
also, similar rate of interest i.e. 9% p.a. was granted by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in_ DLF Homes Panchkula (P) Ltd. Versus Sushila Devi, Civil Ap2cal
Nos.2285-2330 of 2019, decided on 26 February, 2019, by making reference
to the earlier order passed by it in Himanshu Arora's case (supra).
Furthermore, in Nagesh Maruti Utekar Vs. Sunstone Developers Joint

Venture, Consumer Case No. 12 of 2017, decided on 04 May 2022 also, the
the commnitted
Hon ble National Commission awarded interest @9% p.a. from
InShreya Kumar &
date of delivery till actual physical possession is delivered.
Itd. & 3 Ors., Corsumer Case
11 Ors. Vs. M/s. Ansal Housing & Construction
Larger Bench of the Hon'ble
No. 1021 of 2017, decided on 05 May 2022, the
from the committed date
National Commission has awarded interest @9% p.a.
As such, in the present
of delivery till actual physical possession is delivered.
the complainants on the entire
cases also, if we grant interest @9% p.a: to
period of
amounts deposited by them against their unit, after expiry of
agreement, that will meet
possession date, from the date of execution of the

the ends of justice.

partly
35]. For the reasons recorded above, these complaints are
accepted, with costs as under:
bas:c amenities
(i) Opposite Parties No.1 to 5 shall provide all the
and facilities as promised in the brochure and the agreements
etc., as discussed above and also obtain
occupation and

completion certificates from the competent Authorities, within

a
receipt of a
Disputes period of three months (03 months) from the date of
rtified copy of this order.
(ü).Oposite Parties No.1 to 5 shall pay to the complainants
cogrensation by way of interest @9% p.a. from 21.03.2021
(36
31.0O3.2025
ngnths from the date of execution of agreement) till
the entire deposited sale consideration, within a period of 30
 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order,
failing which the entire accumulated amount of compensation
from 21.03.202 I to 31.03.2025 aforesaid shall carry interest
(Q12% p.a. from the datc of default till this entire accumulated
amount is paid to the complainant(s).
(ii). Opposite parties no.1 to 5 shall pay to the complainant(s),
depos1ted
ompCnsatio1 by way of interest (a9% p.a. on the entire
onwards (per month), by the
sale onsideration, w.c.f. O1.04.2025,
compliance of directions given in
10th of the following month till
providing all the basic amenities
and
sub-para no.(i) above qua
certificates
occupation and completion
facilities and obtaning
Authorities.
from the competent
charges from the
shall charge maintenance
(iv). Opposite party no.6 charges, till
complainants only to the
extent of 30% of the total
from April 2325
compliance of directions
given in para no.(i) above
parties
mnade clear that the opposite
onwards. However, it is also
and also water supply to
power supply/back up
shall gjve regular
the complainant(s). charges
maintenance
the advance
(v).Opposite party no.6 shall adjust and
occupation
complainants post receipt of
payable by the maintenance charges so far
out of the
certificates,
completion complainants, without any
March 2025 from the
collected by it till
deduction therefrom.
conplainant(s)
pay to the
parties no. 1 to 5 shall mental
(vi). Opposite Rs.75,000/- for causing them
to the tune of
compensation
providing and adoption of
deficiency in
agony & harassment,
litigation to the
tun: of
cost of
practice; and also
unfair trade days, from
complainants, within a period of 30
Rs.35,000/- to the failing which
certified copy of this order,
receipt of a date of
the date of interest @9%
p.a. from the
amounts shall carry
the said
default till realization.
prompt action and
cut the
5 shall take
No. 1 to
(vi). Opposite
parties further damage and
delay tO avoid
bars in question without
iron complainants.
integrity of the unit
of the
safeguard the
in this

9edres aICom
application(s)
spute:
MA/330/2024 alongwith any other pending
36|
cÛnplainttnd disposed of accordingly.

the parties free of charge

Certified copies of this order be sent to

forthwíth
 20

38] Fe be onsignd to Record Room after completion.

20.03.2025

(RAJESH K. ARYA]
MEMBER
Sd/
PREETINDER SINGH]
MEMBER
Ad

nisootes Redre

Certiied to betue sopY

AM Islo, Sss:etary/Ofein-charge
State Consumer. Disputes
Redressal Commission,
Union Territory, Chandigarh

(lad
Free Certiad CAny
1Date of order
2
2 io. of pages of cider
prepared
3 Date ct A he cer tiliedcopy
4Derpact: No. 499.
ComplainapieA:

[Link] red onto

Gaek
Sisprtes

ynSevedóndatecd

U.. Chandigat

On ate