TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 933
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot CS No. 464, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Opp. Hard Rock Café, Worli, Mumbai-400025. The respondent, in 2013 itself, paid Rs. 92,50,744/- being the MA.NO.2426 of 2018 IN C.A.NO.3294 of 2018 Page 2 of 11 advance amount out of the total sale consideration of Rs. 4,64,86,145/-, and had been requesting the appellant to provide relevant documents so that the registered agreement could be executed. The appellant, on the other hand, was giving written notices that the balance amount be paid failing which the allotment would be cancelled. 2. The appellant cancelled the allotment vide letter dated 28.06.2013. This resulted into the respondent filing a complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC registered as CC ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct prescribed under Rule 5, Forum V of MOFA Rules 1964. 12. It is made clear that opposite parties will charge interest @ 9% per annum from the due date till its realisation. Needful be done within 90 days from today otherwise it will carry penalty of Rs.125/- per day till needful is done. The complainant is present in person. He has come from Bombay and has suffered the agony and harassment for the last 3 years. Consequently, we award Rs.1 lakh against the opposite parties. The said amount be paid to the complainant within 90 days otherwise it will carry interest @ 9% per annum till its realisation." 4. As the appellant had already alienated the apartment in question despite the stay granted by the NCDRC, during the execution p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in its letter and spirit. On behalf of the appellant, it has been contended that the appellant sent repeated letters of demand to the respondent to make the balance payment and get the agreement executed and registered, but the respondent did not pay any heed to these letters. On the other hand, according to the respondent, he had been repeatedly writing to the appellant to provide necessary clearances, the relevant maps and the carpet areas of both the apartments - the original as well as the alternate one offered, but he failed to receive any response from the appellant. 8. The appellant filed the instant Miscellaneous Application for appropriate directions to the respondent to comply with the order dated 20.03.2018 or, in the alterna....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed over to the appellant. Additionally, it was directed that the appellant would handover peaceful and vacant possession of the apartment i.e. 6503 to the respondent within a week. The respondent, in the meantime, was restrained from making any structural changes in the apartment, however, the interior work was permitted to be carried out. On 20.12.2024, on the request of the appellant, it was provided that the payment be released in favour of Macrotech Developers Ltd. as the appellant company had amalgamated with the said company. It appears that the registry had released the amount in favour of the appellant on 30.01.2025 and, subsequently, the appellant issued a communication to the respondent to take possession on 05.02.2025. The said d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....126/- towards infrastructure charges and club membership charges, if the Court so directs. With respect to the remaining amounts, the respondent has denied its liability placing strong reliance on Sections 4 and 6 of the MOFA. 12. Having considered the submissions, the following facts govern the quantification of amount which we are crystallising in order to put a quietus to this matter : (i). The appellant has not provided the relevant documents asked by the respondent relating to the building map, carpet area, relevant NOCs right from the beginning. Neither in any of the communications to the respondent nor in the submissions before us, the appellant has ever stated that it actually provided the documents required by the respo....