Tamil Nadu RERA Directs TATA Value Homes To Pay 3 Lakh To Homebuyer As Compensation For Delay And Mental Agony

Background Facts

On 07.05.2014 Homebuyer (Complainant) booked a flat in the builder's (Respondent) project named TATA Santorini situated at Kuthambakkam, Chennai by paying Rs. 30,000/- as an advance. Total consideration of the flat was Rs.79,66,957/- (including a covered car park).

Further, homebuyer paid all amounts as per the payment schedule, and the agreements for sale and construction were signed on 19.01.2016.

The sale deed was registered on 17.08.2017, but as per the homebuyer, the contents of both deeds were one-sided, favouring the builder. The flat was supposed to be handed over by November 2016. However, the builder only provided possession information through a letter dated 23.12.2017. When the homebuyer took possession in the first week of March 2017, they noticed several defects.

Further, upon taking possession, the homebuyer discovered that sub-standard quality materials were used in construction, leading to defective workmanship. There was water stagnation in all three bathroom floors, and water seepage was evident in the walls of the building. Additionally, the false ceiling, plastering, and painting were not done properly. The builder rearranged around 12 floor tiles, but issues persisted.

Moreover, there was a discrepancy in the carpet area and saleable area compared to what was mentioned in the agreements. Due to these issues, the homebuyer has filed complaint before adjudicating officer of Authority seeking compensation for the delay, mental agony and inconvenience.

Contentions of Builder

Builder contended that the homebuyer should have reported any deficiencies in service to them immediately. Instead, the homebuyer took possession and only mentioned the issues in the complaint. The builder highlighted that the homebuyer had been in continuous possession of the flat for seven years and raised objections only much later.

Additionally, builder contended that the construction agreement clearly states that any compensation by the builder should be settled before the Occupation Certificate date and not beyond that.

Observation and Direction by Authority

On the issue of mental agony due to the delayed possession, the authority noted that construction agreement stated that the flat should be ready for occupation by January 2017, but possession was only offered in December 2017, resulting in a 13-month delay.

The authority found that despite a clause prohibiting compensation claims beyond the date of the Occupation Certificate, the builder was liable to pay compensation for the delay which builder failed to pay at the time of handing over possession.

Based on the delay, mental agony, and the amounts paid by the homebuyer, the authority directed the builder to pay homebuyer Rs. 2,00,000/- for the delay, Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental agony, and Rs. 50,000/- for litigation costs.

Case - Ragothaman Sankar & anr Versus M/s. TATA Value Homes Ltd. (TVHL)

Citation - CCP No.151 of 2022

Order of Date – 08.10.2024

Counsel for Homebuyer – Mr. D. Daniel, Advocate

Counsel for Builder - Mr. Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, Advocate

Click Here To Read/Download The Order