India’s Highest Consumer Court Brings Relief To Thousands Of Home Buyers

India’s Highest Consumer Court Brings Relief To Thousands Of Home Buyers A 3-member bench of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has ruled that all buyers of a housing project will be made party to any case filed against the real estate developer by another buyer. A move that dramatically increases the scale of lawsuits filed against errant builders while benefiting thousands of home buyers across the country. ….to read more click http://wakeupindia-designer.blogspot.com/2016/10/indias-highest-consumer-court-brings.html

 

CONSUMER AS KING – Bldrs with pending cases can’t delay projects unless construction is stayed 
 
Builders usually come up with some excuse to in an attempt to justify their lapses and delay . In a re cent ruling, the Maharashtra State Commission has held that this is not permissible…. to read more click 
 

Victims of Any Unscrupulous Builder, What are the options ?

“Victims of RNA Corp.” OR Victims of Any Unscrupulous Builder, What are the options available for Home Buyer and Aggrieved Flat Owners in Redevelopment Project

How to File a Complaint against a Builder, What are the options available

Any citizen can file a case against a developer. There are several options and situations under which a property buyer can file a complaint. Types of complaints are:

1. EOW

2. Consumer case

3. Suit for Specific Performance of Contract

On the following grounds in which a property buyer can drag an incompetent property developer on violations/ breach of ground
Non-execution of relevant sale agreement despite having received a substantial advance amount
Non-issuance of copies of all relevant documents viz.; development agreement, power of attorney, sanctioned plan (by concerned Regional Authorities), specification of construction materials/design as per sanctioned plan and any other relevant documents
Charged higher than the agreed amount
No issuance of proper receipt(s) against the paid amount
Poor quality construction
Delivering of a house not complying to agreed specifications
No free parking space within the premises
Did not form a co-operative housing society and handed over to members
Non-provision of water storage tank
Non-provision of proper ventilation and light
Delayed possession beyond the stipulated time limit
Not obtaining completion certificate from the concerned registered (by the authorities) architect
Non-issuance of Occupancy Certificate at the time of delivery of respective flats/house to its occupants
Non-declaration of expenses against which the developer collected money

And many more…

Click Here for more

Empowering Underprivileged Students through Legal Education – IDIA

When he was teaching at the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (WB NUJS),  Prof Shamnad Basheer noticed that a majority of students at this premier legal institution came from urban, English-speaking, English-medium-educated backgrounds. This was a pattern that repeated across elite law institutes, with richer, English-speaking youngsters forming a majority of the students. This is not at all representative of the diverse population of the country.
Prof Basheer realised that by placing the tool of legal knowledge in their hands and allowing them to take up their own cause, he would be empowering underprivileged people far more meaningfully and removing their reliance on privileged people. He made up his mind to initiate an effort to increase access to millions of students from underprivileged backgrounds and marginalised communities. Then, with the support of the then vice chancellor of WB NUJS,
Prof MP Singh, he conceptualised IDIA—Increasing Diversity by Increasing Access. A not-for-profit entity called IDIA Charitable Trust was set up with Dr Basheer, Prof Singh as well as Justice Ruma Pal and Shishira Rudrappa.
IDIA works with a community of dynamic student volunteers. Dr Basheer says, “Their passion and motivation on the ground keeps the organisation charged up and constantly engaged.” Interacting with the IDIA scholars is also a learning opportunity for the team which works at converting each adversity into an advantage and build resilience. These volunteers travel to specific schools and begin with sensitising students, teachers and parents about the benefits of a legal education. IDIA then conducts a basic aptitude test to identify promising students. These students are guided and trained to for the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) which includes help with written and spoken English. It provides study material which will now be provided online as well. IDIA is also working with national law colleges to get fee waivers for scholars to help pay their way through college or arrange support from lawyers and law school alumni.
Candidates who clear CLAT are also allotted mentors in law schools to guide them and to ensure that they are not rendered as ‘misfits’ or feel ‘socially awkward’ in law schools but hone their talents and abilities to their fullest potential.
While this work began in West Bengal, IDIA now has local chapters operating from New Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Ranchi, Jodhpur, Gangtok, Bhopal, Cochin, Gandhinagar, Bengaluru, Chennai, Guwahati, Bhubaneswar, Lucknow, Patna, Cuttack and Hyderabad.
Getting the law institutes to see the value of diversity on campus and to understand that IDIA scholars are not charity cases that would cause the institutes’ standards to plunge, was a challenge. Over time, it became evident that IDIA scholars did well and are actively engaged in campus activities, after overcoming the initial hurdle of dealing with English as a medium of instruction and the relative socio-cultural isolation that occurs in the first year or two. IDIA arranges for financial support for IDIA scholars, once they gain admission into the top law schools. Fund-raising is a huge challenge. “On the one hand, law institutes are constantly rising tuition fees but there is no corresponding increase in scholarships/waivers. On the other hand, there is the constant hunt for institutional support for funding which is, strangely, not forthcoming within the country,” says Shruthi Chandrasekaran, director, IDIA.
IDIA believes that “a good legal education enables the cultivation of personal autonomy, intellectual independence and the development of critical life skills beyond the traditional goals of teaching/training/learning of specific skills.”
Its ultimate goal is bigger.  Ms Chandrasekaran says, “In the long run, we hope that the ecosystem evolves to self-correct from time to time and embrace diversity as its core theme, to the point that the presence of an external third-party organisation addressing the diversity deficit (such as IDIA) is rendered unnecessary.”
All donations to IDIA are exempt from income-tax under Section 80-G.
IDIA Charitable Trust
No. E 1/9, Hanumanthappa Layout,
Ulsoor Road, Bengaluru – 560 042
Telephone 080-42197924

Consumer Uno

Clipboard01Everybody in today’s India has a complaint, but does not have the time to take up the issue and get it resolved. A complaint could be anything from a wrongful deduction on your mobile to a builder unwilling to give you your money back. A platform has been developed by a young Chennai based lawyer Aashish Krishna Kumar who looks forward in empowering consumers across India through ConsumerUno. ConsumerUno is a simple and friendly consumer redressal organization. Any consumer grievance you have, you can go ahead and file a complaint with ConsumerUno and ConsumerUno has a four step redressal process through which they take action on your complaint. ConsumerUno also has a simple yet efficient mobile app through which a consumer can file a complaint at any point of time and can also attach the picture. If the complaint is still unresolved after the intervention of ConsumerUno, they also draft you a Consumer Complaint, and put you in touch with a lawyer in your city or explain the procedure involved in filing a case in the consumer forum and help you in reaching the logical end.

File a complaint by visiting www.consumeruno.com or call +919884512334

Follow their Facebook page for constant updates – https://www.facebook.com/consumeruno/

Or you can download the android mobile application – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.avonmobility.consumerfirst&hl=en

 

Juhu hotel fined Rs 7.5L after valet-parked SUV stolen

A consumer forum recently ordered Juhu-based Ramee Guestline Hotel and Jay Ambe Valet Parking to pay a total compensation of Rs 7.55 lakh to a patron of the hotel after his SUV parked by a valet was stolen from the premises in 2012. The order was passed ex parte, in the absence of the representatives of the hotel and valet parking agent.
Referring to the FIR filed for vehicle theft and the notice sent to the opposite parties, the Additional Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum said, “It shows that the vehicle was entrusted to Guddu Jha, an employee of the opponent parties. Therefore, the opponents are liable for the act of their agent, for deficiency of service on his part.”
The complaint was filed by Ramgirish Sahani and his son, Rahul, from Khar. Rahul and his friends visited the hotel in a Tata Safari on November 3, 2012. Rahul gave the keys to Jha, who was employed by the hotel to park vehicles of guests, at 12.15am.

Rahul said Jha assured him about his identity and safe parking of the vehicle. A valet parking receipt was also issued to Rahul. The complaint stated that at 2.45am, when Rahul left the hotel, he produced the receipt and sought his car. But when Jha went to fetch the SUV it was missing.
Rahul alleged that Jha was negligent in parking the vehicle. Hence, Jha, being their employee the hotel and the valet parking agent were “vicariously liable” for the theft of the vehicle. The matter was reported to the police and Rahul issued a notice to the opponents, seeking compensation.
Along with the complaint, the Sahanis submitted the exit check, Jha’s statement and a copy of the FIR to prove Rahul’s visit and the parking of his SUV in the valet parking area through Jha. Calculating the compensation amount, the forum said that the documents showed that the SUV was purchased in 2009-10. “Considering 10% depreciation per year, the complainants are entitled to get Rs 7 lakh towards the cost of the vehicle, and Rs 50,000 towards compensation,” the forum said.
It held that Rs5,000 was to be paid to the Sahanis towards cost of the complaint.

 

Rebecca Samervel

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Juhu-hotel-fined-Rs-7-5L-after-valet-parked-SUV-stolen/articleshow/51246236.cms

Cinema hall told to pay Rs 5L for overcharging for packaged water

Cinemas, theatre and other places of public entertainment generally overcharge customers. This is rampant, but rarely does a consumer take action. Here is a case where a consumer took on the mighty Reliance Media Works, and succeeded in asserting consumer rights.

Case Study: Manoj Kumar went for a movie at Big Cinemas, Jaipur, run by Mumbai-based Reliance Media Works. He bought a bottle of Aquafina water. The printed price showed an MRP of Rs 16, but Manoj was charged Rs 30. The bill gave a break up of Rs 26 09 for the water and Rs 391 as taxes.Manoj was upset at being overcharged, and asked for the complaint book, but it was not provided.

Manoj filed a complaint before the district forum. Reliance contested the complaint, contending that the bottles were purchased from Varun Beverages, with a printed MRP of Rs 30, approved by Aquafina Pepsico company .These bottles had a higher MRP as they were meant for sale in cinema halls, while regular ones for “ordinary people“ sold in “ordinary shops“ had an MRP of Rs 16. However, no proof was furnished in support of this .

The forum upheld Manoj’s complaint and directed the cinema hall to refund the excess amount of Rs 14. In addition, Rs 5,000 was awarded as compensation for mental agony and Rs 1,500 towards litigation costs. Reliance challenged this order before the Rajasthan State Commission, but the appeal was dismissed. Reliance then filed a revision petition, claiming that there was adequate provisions for free drinking water and nobody was forced to purchase bottled water. It reiterated its stand about the special MRP for sale of water bottles in cinema halls, and alleged that the bottle with the MRP of Rs 16 had not been sold by the cinema, but had been purchased by Manoj from a local shop, and was being used to file a false and frivolous complaint. The commission observed that the main questions were whether a service provider could charge more than the MRP , and whether cinema halls can have a special MRP different from the ordinary MRP . Expressing these to be serious issues, the commission summoned the Director of Weights & Measures, and also Pepsico India Holdings for an explanation.

The commission noted that no evidence had been produced by Reliance to show that it had sold a bottle of water bearing a special MRP . It observed that Manoj appeared to be a vigilant consumer and a whistleblower who would not allow cinema halls to repeatedly commit illegalities, and wanted to bring such malpractices to an end. It rejected Reliance’s argument that Manoj was not a consumer and that it was permissible to charges more than the MRP in view of a Delhi high court judgment in Delhi Gymkhana Club vs Union of India.

The commission observed that Pepsico was making contrary submission by stating that its Aquafina bottles were priced at Rs 16, but it was permissible to have two different MRPs. It said this “flip flop stand“ had created a doubt whether the company was working in cahoots with Reliance and other cinema halls. It then warned Pepsico to have only one MRP , and stated that it would not allow such a practice to overcharge people.

Accordingly , by its judgement of February 1, delivered by Justice J M Malik for the bench along with Dr S M Kantikar, the commission upheld the decision of holding Reliance liable. In addition, the commission saddled Reliance with further deterrent costs of Rs 5 lakh for illegal enrichment by charging and extorting money from their customers. This amount would have to be deposited in the commission’s Legal Aid Account within 90 days, or with 9% interest if delayed.

Impact: Overcharging consumers is not permissible. Earlier, in another case, the Maharashtra State Commission had ruled dual pricing would constitute an unfair trade practice.

Jehangir Gai

(The author is a consumer activist and has won the Govt. of India’s National Youth Award for Consumer Protection. His e mail is jehang ir.gai.columnist@outlook.in)

http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31804&articlexml=CONSUMER-AS-KING-Cinema-hall-told-to-pay-29022016008022

Actual loss need not be reimbursed if consumer claim is even partly false

 Cheating does not pay , and trying to inflate a claim on the basis of fa bricated documents disentitles the insured rom getting any benefits whatsoever under a policy .Case Study:Anjal Garments of Ghaziabad was in the business of manufacturing and exporting home furnishing products. The firm had obtained two Standard Fire and Special Perils policies from Oriental Insurance to cover its fac ory, machinery , furniture and fix ure, and stocks including raw ma erials, finished, semi-finished goods and packing materials for a um of Rs 7 crore.

On March 22, 2015, the firm intimated the insurance company that a major fire had occurred the previous evening due to a short circuit, and the estimated loss was about Rs 4 crore. The firm later filed a claim pegging the loss at Rs 5,11,08,267.The insurance company appointed a surveyor to assess the loss and al o asked the Loss Prevention Asso ciation to examine the claim. The company later appointed an inves tigator to probe the incident. On the basis of the reports, the company repudiated the claim, alleging that the fire was not accidental due to short circuit, and an exaggerated and fabricated claim had been lod ged by manipulating the bills and the stock statement.

The firm filed a complaint befo re the National Commission for a direction to pay the claim along with interest, and a further amount of over Rs 7.9 crore for loss of business. The insurance company contested the case, pointing out how the claim had been inflated. It relied on the statement of the store incharge who said there had been a power failure that day , and the generator, MCB and electric connection had been shut down at the time of leaving the premises.

This was also corroborated by the security guard. Even though the exact cause of fire had not been established, it did not appear to be accidental fire.

The surveyor had recorded the firm’s unwillingness to produce the account books. There were discrepancies in the records submitted. There was no correspondence in respect of many export orders, and transactions worth over Rs 6 crore had been made without any letter of credit to purchasers who had defaulted. The purchase bills also revealed irregularities, showing exaggerated purchases.

The insurance firm said the cla im had rightly been repudiated due to manipulation of records and false declarations.

The National Commission concluded that the cause of the fire appeared to be a wilful act. Also, at least three of the challans were found to be false and fabricated to inflate the claim. So, the commission indicted the firm for submitting a false estimate of loss. Accordingly , by its order on February 12, delivered by Justice VK Jain for the bench along with Dr BC Gupta, the commission held the firm’s conduct to constitute a breach of the insurance contract, and ruled that the insurance company was entitled to repudiate the claim.

Impact:

Even if the claim is partly fraudulent or based on manipulated documents, the insurance company would be entitled to repudiate the entire claim. Even the genuine loss would not be reimbursable under such circumstances.

Jehangir B Gai

(The author is a consumer activist and has won the Govt. of India’s National Youth Award for Consumer Protection. His email is jehangir.gai.columnist@outlook.in)

Builder cannot compel the flat purchaser to opt for any other flat in lieu of the one agreed to be sold

When a project is abandoned by the builder, can the flat purchaser insist on a refund of the amount paid by him? Or would the builder be entitled to insist that the customer should opt for another flat in some other project? In a recent judgment dated January 4, the National Commission’s Bench of Justice J M Malik and Dr S M Kantikar, has held that the flat purchaser would have the right to get his money back along with interest and compensation.
Case Study: Reshma Bha gat and her son Tarun sold a plot of land owned by them in Bangalore. The money had to be invested to avoid capital gains tax, so they booked a flat in Delhi in a project called Napolean I, undertaken by Supertech Ltd. The flat was a 7-star luxu rious 4BHK apartment with servants quarters in Czar Suites, admeasuring 2,490 sq ft super built up area, costing Rs 73,84,300.
 
The allotment letter stated that possession would be given latest by December 2009. In case of delay, the builder had agreed to compensate the flat purchaser by paying damages at the rate of 5% per sq ft per month for a period of 12 months. An agreement was also executed.
 
Till September 2008, the Bhagats had paid Rs 63,99,727, nearly 87% of the agreed amount. When they went in March 2009 to inspect the progress of work, they found that no construction was being carried out.They recorded this in a letter, followed by two reminders. The builder responded, saying possession would be given by October 2010 and he would pay compensation for the delay as per the agreement. The Bhagats claimed that the agreed com pensation for delayed possession was too low, and demanded penal interest at a rate equal to banks levying on corporate hourses for loans advanced. The builder later admitted he had not constructed any 4 BHK flats in Napoleon I project, and instead offered a similar flat at another location. This was not acceptable to the Bhagats, who sought a refund of the entire money paid by them, along with interest. As the buil der refused to comply , they filed a complaint before the National Commission, claiming a refund of their money along with interest, compensation and costs, totalling about Rs 1.4 crore.
 
The builder contested the complaint. He questioned the jurisdiction of the National Commission. The builder also claimed the Bhagats were investors and not bonafide flat purchasers. The builder argued that the agreement provided that he would be entitled to offer an alternative flat, but the Bhagats had not accepted this offer.
 
The failure to construct Na polean I project was due to circumstances beyond its control, so it would be incorrect to consider the delay as a deficiency in service.
 
The National Commission overruled all the objections. It held the complaint to be maintainable as jurisdiction would have to be determined according to the value of the reliefs claimed, which was Rs 1.4 crore.Regarding offer of alternative flats, the commission held that nobody could force a consumer to accept another flat. Such a clause in the agreement would be arbitrary and un-enforceable. The builder alsofailed to produce any evidence to show why the project had been delayed.
 
Accordingly , the commission directed the builder to refund the entire amount of Rs 63,99,727 along with interest at 18% pa from the date of payment till refund.
 
Impact: A builder cannot compel the flat purchaser to opt for any other flat in lieu of the one agreed to be sold. The customer would have the right to get a refund of his money , along with suitable compensation.
Jehangir Gai
 

Consumer Alert – January 2016

Consumer Education and Research Centre
(Registered Public Charitable Trust)

January 2016                                                                              Vol. 3   No.4


COVER STORY
What hotels won’t tell you
Staying at a hotel is one of the best ways to get away from your routine and pamper yourself. Here we unveil some hotel secrets which will help you avoid unpleasant surprises and make the best of your stay. Read more

CERS MEDIATES

  • Syska made to pay insurance claim
  • Builder gives possession of flat after 3 years

If you have a complaint, email it to: complaints@cercindia.org

SETTLED IN COURT

Restaurants can’t charge more than MRP for bottled water      

United India made to pay unfairly deducted sum
CONSUMER TIPS  

Play safe while buying toys 

While toys provide entertainment for children and are also a tool for education and development, it’s important to keep in mind that safety should always come first. Read more
TALL TALK

No kidding!
The claims made in the advt. that Pediasurecontains 37 vital nutrients that increase height, weight and immunity are too good to believe.Read more
SMART CONSUMER

Put used tea bags to good use!

For many people, tea bags are a one-use item. But used tea bags can be reused in an incredible number of ways from soothing puffy eyes to getting rid of body odour. Read more
NUTRITION & HEALTH

Silent epidemic of magnesium deficiency
Low magnesium is known as the ‘silent epidemic’ of our times which often goes undetected and untreated. Read more

PUBLIC INTEREST
Approach a consumer organisation for help
What if your complaint has not been heard or redressed in spite of the letter/phone call and/or post on social media? Take the next step. Read more
SNIPPETS
Did you know it’s better to take drugs for hypertension at night? And, news that lovers of seafood may not like – seafood may contain plastic! Read more
NEWS FLASH

  • Re 1 compensation for call drops
  • Banks cannot reject notes with scribbles
  • Keep junk food out of school, says FSSAI
  • ‘Expiry date’ and ‘best before date’ are distinct: HC
CERC NEWS
National Consumer Rights Day was celebrated on 24 December 2015 with a rally and other programmes. CERC was nominated to an expert panel on salt, sugar and fat in food. Read more
Consumer Education and Research Centre
“Suraksha Sankool”, S. G. Highway, Thaltej, Ahmedabad – 380 054.
Tel: 079-27489945/6, 27450528, 27438752/3/4            Fax: 079-27489947
Email: cerc@cercindia.org
Website: www.cercindia.org

Toll-free Gujarat Consumer Helpline: 1800 233 0222       [from BSNL]
Send your feedback to: alertcerc@gmail.com

New Website for Consumers

Consumer Forum Help (www.consumerforumhelp.com) is a website for the latest articles and information about consumer law.

These articles will help every person know their rights as a consumer and protect their interests when the need comes to. Consumer rights protect consumers in getting their rights in many day to day things like medical insurance, flights, flats, properties, retail purchases and the knowledge of such rights will help every person throughout their lives.

Consumer Forum Help is headed by Dr. Binoy Gupta, an ex Chief Commisioner of Income Tax and a very highly learned LLB, ML and PhD in law. He and his team are sincere in their attempts at bringing rights to consumers and this website is their attempt at getting the information across to everyone.

Contact – How To Contact Us

Hello, we are always open to handling any type of case in the consumer forums in Mumbai. Please feel free to contact us for free consultation or for legal representation.

(However, we can only offer free consultation for cases in other places. But this will be a great help if you are ready to represent your own cases in Consumer Forums)

Email: eleena100@hotmail.com
Phone: 09819116360

You will directly be in touch with Dr. Binoy Gupta, ex Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, LLB, ML and PhD in Law.
He has half a dozen P G Diplomas in a variety of subjects. You can search for his name on google to see the various landmark victories he has had in consumer forum against such companies as BEST,  Zee, ICICI Lombard, and Insurance Companies. He specializes in cases against builders, housing societies and insurance.