Realty firm told to pay Rs 11.4 lakh for not handing plot's possession | chandigarh | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
May 26, 2017-Friday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Realty firm told to pay Rs 11.4 lakh for not handing plot's possession

For failing to deliver a plot within the stipulated time, state consumer disputes redressal commission, Chandigarh, directed realty giant Emaar MGF Land Private Limited to pay Rs 11.40 lakh to a Zirakpur resident.

chandigarh Updated: Jun 05, 2014 00:24 IST
HT Correspondent

For failing to deliver a plot within the stipulated time, state consumer disputes redressal commission, Chandigarh, directed realty giant Emaar MGF Land Private Limited to pay Rs 11.40 lakh to a Zirakpur resident.


As per directives of the consumer commission, the amount paid by the developer Emaar MGF Land Private Limited would include Rs 2 lakh as compensation for deficient services, along with Rs 9.40 lakh as penalty for delay, and Rs 20,000 as cost of litigation, to complainant Girdhari Lal Gupta.

Gupta had moved the consumer commission claiming that he was allotted a plot in Augusta Greens, Sector 109, Mohali Hills, SAS Nagar, in July, 2007. He claimed that the physical possession of the fully developed residential plot was to be handed over to him within a period of two years.

However, Gupta is still awaiting possession of the plot.

Contesting the complaint, Emaar MGF Land Private Limited claimed that the complaint was not maintainable as Gupta did not fall within the definition of a consumer on the ground that he purchased the plot in resale.

The consumer commission, on June 2, held, "Even after the expiry of a period of more than three and a half years from the promised date of July 2010, delivery of physical possession of the plot has not been made leading to harassment of the complainant."

"The entire sale consideration of the plot had already been paid but it's possession was not delivered to the complainant as the same had not been developed. By making a misleading statement that the possession was to be delivered within three years, and by not abiding by the commitments, the developer was not only deficient in rendering service, but also indulged into unfair trade practice," the order read.