The Ludhiana Improvement Trust (LIT) was ordered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to pay INR 1 lakh in compensation to a complainant for failing to provide possession of a flat for 14 years. Despite multiple attempts by the complainant to acquire possession and reschedule installment payments, the LIT did not respond, leading to the complainant seeking legal intervention for possession, rescheduled payments, and compensation. This case underscores the importance of timely delivery and communication in real estate transactions to prevent consumer grievances and legal disputes.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ruled that the Ludhiana Improvement Trust (LIT) must compensate a complainant with INR 1 lakh for their failure to provide possession of a flat even after a staggering 14-year delay.
The commission has explicitly instructed the LIT to disburse the compensation within a 30-day timeframe from the receipt of the order copy. Failure to comply will result in additional liability for the LIT, accruing interest at a rate of 8% per annum from the order date until the actual payment.
According to the complainant, the ordeal began when they applied for the allotment of a multi-storey semi-finished flat in Rajeev Enclave, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, under the Self-Financing Scheme on February 26, 2005. A deposit of INR 1,50,000 was made.
During the allotment draw on April 29, 2005, the opposite parties granted the complainant an HIG flat under the development scheme. Subsequently, the complainant was to fulfill the payment schedule totaling INR 14,60,000 in installments.
An agreement of sale was executed on June 21, 2006, with the complainant paying INR 2,74,150 through a demand draft dated October 4, 2005. However, the draft was returned due to delays, which were later condoned on May 2, 2006. Additional installments were made, including INR 2,19,000 on September 7, 2006, and another draft of the same amount on March 7, 2007, which was refused by the officials.
The complainant received a letter dated April 26, 2007, informing them of a stay imposed by civil courts, halting construction work. On December 11, 2006, the executive engineer deferred installment receipts until further notice, promising a reschedule post-stay vacation. Despite repeated visits by the complainant to acquire possession and reschedule installments, no progress was made.
Out of the 162 flats slated for construction, work on only 21, including the complainant's, was halted due to court orders. Of the remaining 141, possession of 95 had been granted, leaving 46 vacant. The complainant, along with other affected allottees, pleaded for possession and rescheduling to no avail.
Despite willingness to pay remaining installments, subject to a fresh schedule and possession, the complainant received no response to a legal notice dated June 12, 2020. Thus, the complaint sought directives for possession, rescheduled payments, or an alternative flat under similar terms, coupled with a compensation of INR 2,00,000 and litigation expenses of INR 55,000.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
