The South Goa consumer disputes redressal forum has directed real estate developer Queeny Realty Pvt Ltd to pay compensation of Rs 3.76 lakh along with interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum over delay in delivery of a flat.
In the order, the two-member bench headed by Pradip Sawaiker and member Cynthia Colaco directed to complete the construction and hand over the possession of the flat within a period of one month and pay additional compensation of Rs 12,000 per month from the date of this order till actual delivery of possession of the flat to the complainant.
The order came in a case filed by Satyajeet Kumar, buyer of the flat in the housing project, Queeny Visions-II, in Velsao-Pale, at Mormugao. The buyer has alleged that he had purchased the flat in an under construction housing project in February 2014 and delivery was promised in seven months by September.
The premises, however, was not delivered to him even at the time of filing of the complaint in January this year, he had alleged. The complainant has been occupying premises on a rent of Rs 12,000 per month. From July 2014 to September 2016, he has paid a total amount of Rs 3.17 lakh towards the rent. The complainant said he had also incurred heavy losses since June 2014 as he had obtained loan from the bank for purchase of the premises and paid interest of Rs 3.01 lakh from June 2014 till August 2016.
The opposite party had an agreement for sale in February 2014 and agreed to sell a 103.93 square metre flat on the second floor of building-E of the complex Queeny Visions-II.
In terms of agreement, an amount of Rs 6, 39,158, inclusive of service tax, was to be paid at the time of execution of the agreement and balance amount of Rs 25,56,632, inclusive of service tax of Rs 76,632, was to be paid on possession by June 2014. It is alleged that the opposite party did not satisfy the condition of handing over the possession in the month of June 2014 with further grace period of three months.
The complainant paid total of Rs 22 lakh including second installment to the opposite party to facilitate completion of construction work speedily though he was not obliged to make the payment of second installment before delivery of the possession. However, the opposite party did not deliver the possession of the said premises to the complainant either in June 2014 or in September 2014 as agreed, it was stated.