Parsvnath Developers asked to compensate homebuyer for delay
Delhi state consumer commission has directed Parsvnath to pay Rs3 lakh as compensation to a homebuyer for delay in handing over the possession of a flat
Latest News »
- CAG report blames institutional failure for poor flood management
- Sushma Swaraj ‘lied’ in Parliament on border standoff, says China’s Global Times
- Audi joins Mercedez-Benz in diesel car recall as emissions scrutiny grows
- Rs12,000 crore worth of digital transactions carried out: Ravi Shankar Prasad
- China, India equity funds, local debt top H1 emerging market performance tables
New Delhi: The Delhi state consumer commission has directed a real estate firm to pay Rs3 lakh as compensation to a homebuyer for delay in handing over the possession of a flat.
The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission also asked Parsvnath Developers Ltd to refund Rs46,28,933 to Varun Dev, who had paid the amount for a flat in Ghaziabad, while rejecting the builder’s claim that global recession had slowed the construction of its various projects.
More From Livemint »
“Sole defence raised by the firm in not handing over the physical possession of the flat is ‘global recession’. No material has been placed on record by the firm to support his contention that there was a ‘global recession’ which resulted into non-completion of the project,” the bench, including judicial member N.P. Kaushik, said.
The commission has also allowed Rs25,000 as litigation charges to Dev, a central Delhi resident. According to the complaint filed by Dev, he entered into an agreement in 2008 with the firm for the construction of a flat in one of its projects named ‘Parsvnath Exotica’ in Ghaziabad.
It said that the complainant made various payments from time to time totaling to an amount of Rs46,28,933. It further claimed that when he visited the site in the year 2009 there was no construction activity. The firm claimed that global recession had slowed the construction of its various projects.
The company also claimed that there were many other reasons related to various governmental authorities which further delayed the construction.
The commission rejected these contentions, saying the firm has failed to provide any evidence for the same.