Proud Nature Buildtech Private Limited vs Amandeep Singh & Anr

V.K. Jain, J

The appellant entered into an agreement with the complainant/respondent on 15.7.2017 whereby it agreed to sell a residential flat to the respondent for a consideration of Rs.25,50,000/-. The possession of the said flat was to be delivered by 15.8.2017 though a grace period of three months was also available to the appellant for the purpose. Since the possession of the flat was not given to the complainant, she approached the concerned State Commission by way of a consumer complaint seeking possession of the said flat with compensation etc.

The complaint was resisted by the appellant primarily on the ground that the sale deed had been executed in favour of the complainants on 9.10.2017, the possession was offered to them subject to payment of the balance sale consideration of Rs.1,35,000/-. The appellant handed over the keys of the flat to the complainants in November, 2017 in order to enable them to carry out some balance work which had remained unexecuted in the flat. It was also alleged that the cheques which the complainant had given to the appellant were returned by the bank for want of sufficient funds and later with the remarks that the payment had been stopped. It was further stated that since the complainant had not paid the balance amount of Rs.1,35,000/- and GST amounting to Rs.84,000/-, it had not delivered the keys of the flat to the complainants.

The State Commission vide its order dated 17.05.2018 given the following directions to the appellant:-

"i) to deliver physical possession of the flat, in question, complete in all respects, along with Occupation and Completion Certificate obtained from the competent authorities; subject to payment of Rs.33,000/- towards the balance sale consideration and Rs.84,000/- towards GST;

ii) to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the amount deposited by the complainants i.e. Rs.25,17,000/- with effect from 15.11.2017 till delivery of physical delivery of possession of the flat, complete in all respects, along with Occupation and Completion Certificate obtained from the competent authorities; as per Clause 2 (a) (iii) of the agreement, Ex.C-2;

iii) to pay Rs.50,000/-, as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by the complainants as well as litigation expenses."

Being aggrieved from the order passed by the State Commission, the appellant is before this Commission.

The learned counsel for the appellant states that not only the possession of the flat has been delivered to the complainants even the compensation awarded by the State Commission has also been paid. He further states that only the Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate could not be obtained from the concerned authority though the appellant had applied for the issuance of the said certificate on 6.6.2018, after the order of the State Commission. He also states that the Occupancy Certificate and the Completion Certificate were denied on the ground that having already executed the sale deed of the flat, the appellant was no more the owner of the flat and, therefore, was not entitled to the issuance of the Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate.

No communication from the concerned authority has been filed by the appellant to show that the Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate was denied on the ground that having sold the flat, the appellant was no more entitled to issuance of the said Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate. In the absence of any documentary evidence, the oral plea advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted.

It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that there was no contractual obligation on the part of the appellant to obtain and deliver the Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate to the complainants. Again, I find no merit in the contention. Having agreed to construct a flat for the complainant and deliver its possession to her, the appellant was under an obligation to obtain the requisite Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate before delivering possession of the flat to the complainants. Such an obligation is implicit in the obligation to deliver possession of the flat subject matter of the agreement between the parties. The appellant could not, in law, have even offered possession of the flat to the complainant without obtaining the requisite Occupancy Certificate and the Completion Certificate. Therefore, I find no merit in this contention as well.

For the reasons stated hereinabove, the appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merit. The appellant, however, is given liberty to produce before the State Commission the communication, if any, which may be issued to him by the concerned Municipal Committee denying Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate solely on the ground that having sold the flat to the complainant, it was no more entitled to issuance of the said Occupancy Certificate and Completion Certificate. Such a communication if produced during the execution proceedings shall be duly considered by the State Commission.