State consumer commission holds city builder responsible for not fulfilling the commitments made in the Brochure

State consumer commission holds city builder responsible for not fulfilling the commitments made in the Brochure

The city based builder Ramaniyam has promoted multi storied flats Pushkar II, in Sholinganallur Near Chennai at the outskirts of the city. They had brought out a detailed Brochure providing details of the building and its special features. 

As  per the Brochure the block of the building in which senior citizens flats are located should have been provided with the  Access Control facility as an enhanced safety measure. 

The senior citizen had booked a flat in the complex based on this promise. The Builder has failed to provide Access Control in the senior citizens' block as promised in the brochure.

The state consumer commission has held that the builder is fully responsible for the fulfilment of  all the promises made in their brochure on the features of the building they promoted. 

A senior citizen was awarded compensation from Ramaniyam for the deficiency in service. The judgement said that a senior citizen has been lured into going for the flat on the promises made in the Brochure. 

According to them the construction agreement with the purchaser is only for the flat concerned and it can differ from buyer to buyer. But when the brochure includes certain features on the building, the builder cannot get away with the claim of not being mentioned in the construction agreement with the buyer. 

The Court also has observed that the Access Control promised in the Brochure is for the building and hence need not have a specific mention in the Construction agreement which is essentially for the flat only.  

The state commission in a land mark judgement has ordered to take back the flat from the senior citizen (who had not moved in even after 3 years ) and compensate him with damages and interest @9%p.a on the purchase value in addition to return of the money originally paid for the flat. The senior citizen in this case argued his case as party in person as per provision in the consumer protection Act.

CONSUMER ASSOCIATION OF INDIA and CIVIC ACTION GROUP both consumer centric voluntary organisations advised the senior citizen to pursue legal remedies since their mediation for an amicable settlement proved futile due to the stubborn attitude of the builder. The case reference in the Consumer Court is 118/17.


No comments:


Blog Archive

நிதி முதலீடு


Recent Posts

Latest Posts

Find us on Facebook