Builder asked to pay Rs 10 lakh for poor construction of house

Mariamma had entered into an agreement with Kumar to construct a house

SC directs real estate firm Unitech to pay back investors Rs 15 crore
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Jan 17 2017 | 2:51 PM IST

The apex consumer commission has directed a private builder in Kerala to pay Rs 10 lakh to a home buyer for delayed and poor quality construction of her house.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, while dismissing an appeal filed by Manoj Kumar, a private builder, against the state commission's order to pay compensation to Mariamma Kurien, said there is no "sufficient cause" for the "inordinate" delay.

"Appellant (Kumar) has failed to make out any cause, much less a sufficient cause for condonation of inordinate delay of 1018 days in filing of the present appeal and in the event the said unexplained delay is condoned and the appeal is entertained, the complainant, who had entered into agreement with the builder as far back as on February 2, 2009, had parted with a huge amount of Rs 30,43,500 and had been granted certain relief by State Commission, would be put to further harassment," the commission said.

The consumer bench headed by its chairman D K Jain also said that the builder was only interested in protracting the matter on one pretext or other.

"We are convinced that in fact the appellant has nothing to say as regards delay and is only interested in protracting the matter on one pretext or the other. If he was really interested in challenging the impugned order, whereby certain directions were issued to him, he would have been on his toes to ensure that the appeal was filed promptly, at least on receiving the free certified copy of the impugned order, which was not to be," the bench said.

According to the complaint, in 2009, Mariamma had entered into an agreement with Kumar to construct a house which he agreed to finish within nine months.

It further alleged that despite paying an amount of Rs 30,43,500, Kumar failed to deliver the project on time.

She also alleged in her complaint that due to several reasons, like low quality of material and bad workmanship, certain portion of the building constructed was found to be not fit for human habitation and she was left with no option except to dismantle the same and reconstruct the building.

State commission had asked Kumar to pay her a sum of Rs 9,01,362 towards the cost of work to be executed, besides paying Rs 1,00,000 as compensation and Rs 5,000 as costs of the proceedings.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jan 17 2017 | 2:30 PM IST

Next Story