Summary
In a miscellaneous application arising from the Court's 2018 order substituting an alternate apartment (No. 6503) for the one originally allotted to the respondent flat purchaser and alienated by the developer in breach of an NCDRC stay, the Court quantified what remained payable by the respondent after he had deposited the balance sale consideration and taken possession. Declining to decide each contested head, and weighing the developer's defaults against the fact that the balance consideration had remained with the purchaser, it fixed a lump sum of Rs.1,40,71,000 in lieu of all interest, taxes and other charges up to the date of possession.
Issues
- What amount was due and payable by the respondent purchaser to the appellant developer towards interest, taxes and other charges, after the balance sale consideration of Rs.3,72,35,401 had been deposited and possession of apartment No. 6503 handed over on 05.02.2025.
Provisions considered
- Sections 4 and 6, Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963The respondent relied on these provisions to deny liability for the interest, delayed-payment charges and most other charges claimed by the developer. The Court did not construe them; it held there was no point dealing with each issue and instead fixed a lump sum in the peculiar facts to do complete justice between the parties. (¶¶ 11, 13)
Held
- The quantification was governed by the following facts: the developer never provided the building map, carpet area and NOCs the purchaser had asked for from the beginning, and never claimed to have done so; the developer, well aware of the NCDRC's stay dated 19.11.2013 against creating third-party rights, alienated the allotted apartment in gross violation of it, complicating and delaying the proceedings; even after the Court's orders it did not disclose the carpet areas of the original and alternate apartments; and while the purchaser could not enjoy possession, the balance consideration remained with him and the developer meanwhile maintained the apartment and paid the essential charges, so equities had to be adjusted. (¶ 12)
- Rather than adjudicate every head of claim (the developer claimed Rs.4,96,52,565, chiefly interest at 9% per annum; the purchaser admitted Rs.2,15,884 and offered a further Rs.15,37,126), the Court in the peculiar facts directed the purchaser to pay the admitted amount, the amount he was ready to pay, taxes on the consideration value of Rs.23,17,990 and a further Rs.1 crore, a total of Rs.1,40,71,000 within eight weeks, in lieu of all outstanding interest, taxes and other charges up to 05.02.2025, the date possession was handed over. (¶¶ 10, 11, 13, 14)
- Charges and dues accruing for use and occupation after handover of possession are payable by the purchaser in addition. The agreement to sell/sale deed is to be executed within two months of the payment, with stamp duty and registration expenses borne by the purchaser; the earlier restriction on structural changes stands discharged. (¶ 14)
Result
Miscellaneous Application disposed of. Respondent to pay Rs.1,40,71,000 to the appellant within eight weeks of receipt of the order in full settlement of interest, taxes and other charges up to 05.02.2025; charges accruing after possession payable additionally; agreement/sale deed to be executed within two months of payment at the respondent's expense for stamp duty and registration; restriction on structural changes under order dated 10.12.2024 discharged.