By Dr. Sanjay Chaturvedi LLB, PhD
Nikhil Chopra V/s JVPD Properties Pvt. Ltd. (CC005000000001348) Order Dated 5th April 2018 by Maha RERA
Maha RERA observed “The complainant has filed this complaint under Section 18 to claim a refund of his amount from the respondents with interest. The respondents issued a letter dated 24.07.2017 expressing their inability to complete the project.
The respondents have filed their reply. The relevant portion thereof demonstrates that the complainant is an investor and therefore, the Authority has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. It is further contended that for the application under Section 18 of RERA, there must be an agreement for sale and the complainant does not have it. lt is a fundamental principle of the law of contract that once a proposal is accepted; it becomes a contract provided, it is coupled with lawful consideration and lawful object and it is not specifically barred by any statute. There can be oral agreement for sale or it can be also in written form. ln this case the complainant has relied upon allotment letter, admittedly issued by the respondents on 11.07.2014. It is the contention of the respondents that there is no concluded contract. Hence, it is necessary to look at the allotment letter. On its perusal, it becomes clear that the complainant agreed to purchase the flats and the respondents agreed to sell them for the consideration mentioned in the letter. The respondents agreed to deliver the possession of the flats within 42 months from receipt of final commencement certificate from plinth level. All these terms and conditions have been accepted and signed by both the parties.
Therefore, there remains no doubt in my mind that it is a concluded contract which has taken place on 11.07.2014.” The Authority, therefore, ordered “The respondents shall refund the amount mentioned in Para-l0 of this order. 2. The respondents shall pay the complainant Rs. 20,000/- towards the cost of the complaint. 3. The respondents shall pay simple interest at the rate of 10.05% from the dates of receipts of the amount till they are refunded. 4. The charge of the aforesaid amount shall be on the respondents’ property under project bearing C.T.S. No. 634/5 and 64D “S” ward of village Tirandaz, Taluka Kurla, Mumbai, till the complainant’s claim is satisfied.”
Credits: Landmark Judgements of RERA (Book)