Transfer of Development
Rights is popularly known as TDR.
TDR is generated when a
land owner or developer surrenders his land for public utility purpose and
offers to re-house slum dwellers or those displaced by infrastructure projects
free of cost. In return, such owner or
developer shall get the right to construct a proportional area in another plot.
TDR is an important
component in revamp in suburbs as builders use this to double the existing FSI
(Floor Space Index) of 1 to 2.
Among other Statutory as
well as Contractual obligations on the Builder, according to Consumer
Protection Courts, the builder can not raise the defence about limitation, it
the builder fails to give possession notice to buyer as required by laws or
under a contract.
Case Law: Collin and Cheryl Paes had booked a villa at
Navelim in Goa in a complex knwown as D’Silva Residency, to be developed by
M/s. Homemakers. According to the Sale Agrement dated: 13/10/2008, a total
amount of Rs.40.00 lakhs had to be paid for the construction and sale of the
Villa admeasuring 210 Sq.M. along with proportionate undivided right on the
land.
The agreement provided
that possession would be given within six months, which may be extended twice
by grace periods of three months at a time. So the total time frame came to 12
months. The agreement stipulated that
the purchaser would have to take possession within 30 days of the builder
giving a written intimation that the villa was ready for occupation.
The Paes couple claimed
that even though the agreed price was Rs.40.00 lakhs, they paid a total sum of
Rs.63,11,870/- as demanded by the builder citing inflation, rise in
construction cost, and improvements made in the villa etc. Yet the builder also kept on extending the date of possession.
Finally, when the builder
failed to hand over possession of the villa even upto January 31, 2014, the
Paes couple had got a legal notice issued to the builder. As this too failed to
evoke any response, the Paes couple filed a complaint before the Goa State Commission for Consumer Redressal.
The builder contested the
complaint. The builder justified his demand for the additional amount and
relied on a valuation report issued by Jammu and Kashmir Bank, which showed the
value of the villa to be about Rs.25.00 lakhs and the land worth Rs.35
lakhs. The builder further claimed that
the villa had been undervalued in the agreement as Paes couple had made this request
to avoid tax problems. The builder
claimed Paes couple used to frequently pass by the Villa and were aware that it
was ready by 2009 itself within the stipulated time frame. The builder further contended that he did not
give possession since Mr. Paes failed to pay the entire amount.
The State Consumer
Redressal Commission observed that the agreement cast an obligation on the
builder to give a written intimation after the villa was ready for
occupation. The requirement to give the
intimation would not be an empty formality, but an obligation under the terms
of the agreement. Limitation would begin to run from the date of such
intimation. The State Commission further
held that regardless of whether or not the villa was ready in time, the cause of
action would continue as the builder had failed to give the intimation about
possession as required under the agreement.
The State Commission also
noticed that the builder had failed to respond to the legal notice.
The State Commission
accordingly held the builder liable to pay interest on Rs.63,11,870/- at 14.75%
p.a, from the date of complaint till realization, along with compensation of
Rs.25,000/- for mental trauma and costs of Rs.5,000/-.
It is the duty of the
builders to put in place safety measures at construction sites, a Sessions
Court said while upholding the conviction of a builder for causing death by
negligence.
Additional Sessions Judge
HS Mahajan was hearing an appeal filed by Rajesh Mehta, convicted by the
Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, Vikhroli, for causing the death of a 11-year
old boy due to negligence.
According to the
prosecution, Dhiraj Khunte went missing on June 12, 2006, after he returned
from School. The family initially
searched for him, and registered a missing complaint the next day. Meanwhile, the Police recovered the body of a
boy from the water tank of an under-construction building near the Khuntes’
house.
Dhiraj and some other boys
had gone there to play and he fell into the tank and died, the prosecution
said. The Police had then registered an
offence against the builder.
For More...........:
No comments:
Post a Comment