Real estate firm asked to pay Rs 25L for harassing buyer

Written by PTI | New Delhi | Updated: Jul 18 2014, 20:02pm hrs
Real estateThe forum asked the builder to pay a compensation of Rs 25 lakh to Misra for all deficiency.(Reuters)
Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd has been asked by a consumer forum here to pay Rs 25 lakh to a man for harassing him by keeping him in the dark about matters related to a flat and demanding illegal considerations from him.

The New Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, asked the builder to pay Rs 25 lakh to Gurgaon resident Vijay Misra and asked it to issue him a fresh statement of dues and handover fresh possession letter of the flat, as per old agreed rates.

"We have considered the rival submissions and find in a text book case of harassment of innocent consumers. Opposite Party (builder) deliberately kept the complainant in dark by writing letters at wrong address and then demanded illegal considerations of holding things to restoration charges and failed to explain additional area charges for 113 sq ft...

"We hold all the action of the Opposite Party illegal, and nothing is payable on account of restoration charges plus holding charges or cancellation charges. The Opposite Party has acted in unfair way," the forum, also comprising its members S R Chaudhary and Ritu Garodia, said.

The forum asked the builder to pay a compensation of Rs 25 lakh to Misra for all deficiency, harassment and litigation expenses caused to the man.

Misra had told the forum that he had paid for the flat in 2008 by taking a loan. After sometime, he shifted to a new rented accommodation and communicated his new address to the company.

He did not hear anything from the real-estate developer for two years and in 2010, he came to know that he was sent a letter of offer of possession at his old address and now he was being asked to pay holding charges and Rs seven lakhs for some increased area of the flat.

He confronted the builder about his new address being given to it but the demand went on to increase upto 11 lakhs.

The forum noted that the builder, in its reply, raised irrelevant issues of dispute between the parties and loan etc, not paid to a bank.