IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. _______ OF 2023

(Arising out of the Impugned Judgment and Final Order dated

12.06.2023 passed by the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission in Consumer Complaint No. 3505 of 2017.)

IN THE MATTER OF: -

M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS … Appellant

Versus

APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & ORS. .... Respondent(s)

ALONG WITH

I.A. NO. ________ OF 2023

(An Application Seeking Stay of the Operation of the Impugned Order)

I.A. NO. ________ OF 2023

(Application for Exemption from filing Official Translation of Document)

PAPER BOOK
(FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)

ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT: KUSH CHATURVEDI

 INDEX
S. Particulars of Documents Page No. of part to Remarks
which it
No
. belongs
Part I Part-II
[Conte [Contents of
nts of file alone.
Paper
Book]
[i] [ii] [iii] [iv] [v]
1 Court Fee
2 Office Report on Limitation A A
3 Listing Performa. A1-A2 A1-A2
4 Cover page of Paper Book A-3
5 Index of Record of Proceedings A-4
6 Limitation Report prepared by the
Registry
7 Defect List A-4

8 Note Sheet NS 1 to

9 Synopsis & List of Dates B – BB

10 Copy of the impugned order dated

12.06.2023 passed by the Ld.
National Consumer Disputes 1 – 46
Redressal Commission in
Consumer Complaint No. 3505 of
2017.

11 Civil Appeal along with affidavit in

support thereof 47 – 101

12 ANNEXURE A-1
Copy of Order dated 21.07.2009
passed by the High Court of 102 – 105
Judicature at Bombay in Writ
Petition No. 5665 of 2009
13 ANNEXURE A-2
Copy of sample Agreement to Sell 106 - 140
dated 27.08.2010

14 ANNEXURE A-3
Copy of Order dated 12.04.2012
passed by the Court of Sub 141 - 150
Divisional Office Thane Division,
Thane Along with English
Translated Copy.

15 ANNEXURE A-4
Copy of the Order dated 13.12.2017 151
passed by the Ld. NCDRC in CC
No. 3505 of 2017

16 ANNEXURE A-5
Copy of the amended Complaint 152 - 166
dated 29.10.2018 filed by the
Respondents before the Ld.
NCDRC in CC No. 3505 of 2017

17 ANNEXURE A-6
Copy of Reply dated 03.11.2018
filed by the Appellant in CC No. 167 - 189
3505 of 2017 before the Ld. NCDRC

18 ANNEXURE A-7
Copy of the Order dated 05.12.2018 190 - 191
passed by the Ld. NCDRC in CC
No. 3505 of 2017

19 I.A. NO. ____ OF 2023

An Application Seeking Stay of the 192 - 196
Operation of the Impugned Order

20 I.A. NO. ____ OF 2023

Application for Exemption from 197 - 199
filing Official Translation of
Document.
21 F/M 200

22 V/M 201

23 MEMO OF PARTIES 202 - 216

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. _______ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS … Appellant

Versus

APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & ORS. .... Respondent(s)

OFFICE REPORT ON LIMITATION

1. The Appeal is/are within time.

2. The Appeal is barred by time and there is delay of 0 days in filing

the same against the Final order dated 12.06.2023 Application for

condonation of 0 days delay has been filed.

3. There is delay of 0 days in refiling the Appeal and Application for

condonation of 0 days delay in refiling has been filed.

BRANCH OFFICER

PLACE: NEW DELHI

FILED ON: 31.07.2023
 PROFORMA FOR FIRST LISTING

SECTION:

THIS CASE PERTAINS TO (Please tick/ check the correct box):

Central Act: (Title)

Section :

Central Rule : (Title) N.A.

Rule No(s) N.A.

State Act: (Title) N.A.

Section : N.A.

State Rule : (Title) N.A.

Rule No(s): N.A.

Impugned Interim

Order :

Impugned Final Order 12.06.2023

/Decree :

High Court : (Name)

Names of Judges:

Tribunal /Authority : NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION
(Name)
 Names of Judges: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM SURAT
RAM MAURYA, PRESIDING
MEMBER AND HON’BLE MR. BINOY
KUMAR, MEMBER
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Nature of the Civil Criminal

matter

2. a) Appellant: M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS

b) Email I.D. [email protected]

c) Mobile phone number: 8104422798

3. a) Respondent: APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & ORS.

b) Email I.D. N/A

c) Mobile phone number: N.A.

4. a) Main category 18 Ordinary Civil Matters

classification

b) Sub classification:

5. Not to be listed before: N.A.

6(a) Similar disposed of matter NO SIMILAR MATTER

with citation, if any, & case DISPOSED OF

details

6(b) Similar pending matter NO SIMILAR MATTER PENDING

with case details

7. CRIMINAL MATTERS: NO

a) Whether accused /convict has Yes NO

surrendered:

b) FIR No. N.A.

c) Police Station: N.A.

d) Sentenced awarded N/A

e) Period of Sentence N/A

Undergone including

Period of detention/

custody undergone:

8. LAND ACQUISITION MATTERS: NO

a) Date of Section 4 notification N.A.

b) Date of Section 6 notification N.A.

c) Date of Section 17 notification N.A.

9. TAX MATTERS : State the Tax

effect:

10. SPECIAL CATEGORY: (first petitioner/ appellant

only):
 Senior citizen > 65 years SC/ ST Woman

/child

Disabled Legal Aid case in

custody

11. Vehicle Number (in case of Motor Accident Claim N.A.

matters) :

KUSH CHATURVEDI
AOR for Appellant
Registration No. 1979
Office: - A-53, 17-A,
Noida, Uttar Pradesh – 201 301
(+91) 9711114870
[email protected]

PLACE: NEW DELHI

DATE: 31.07.2023

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
S.NO. DATE OF RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PAGES

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.
 SYNOPSIS B
The present First Appeal challenges the final Judgment of the NCDRC dated
12.06.2023 concluding that there was deficiency in obtaining Occupancy
Certificates (OCs) belatedly despite the following admitted facts:

1. All 4 buildings were constructed as per the sanction plan;

2. All 4 buildings were constructed within time;
3. Possession of all units were handed over within time (2010-2013);
4. The applications for the OCs and Plinth Certificate for the Club House
were made without delay in 2010, 2011 and 2013 but only OC for Building
No. 1 was given in August 2010;
5. The TMC suddenly sought an NoC under the ULC in August 2012, which
was challenged in W.P. No.178 of 2013, and later found to be
unnecessary;
6. The TMC did not respond till 2014, when it demanded an NoC from
MHADA, which was immediately supplied in March 2015;
7. Again, in September 2015, TMC demanded 7.02 cr. as penalty, including
Rs.95.36 lakh as ‘Labour Welfare Tax’, which was dropped in 2018, after
which the remaining amount was paid without prejudice to WP
178/2013;
8. The OC applications were again rejected on 12.07.2022, but after a Writ
Petition round, came to be granted for Building Nos. 2 & 3 on 21.03.2023;

The erroneous findings are:

I. The revised plans for 2 additional buildings being the reason for objection to
OC [Paras 13 & 17]: These revised plans to utilize the remaining area
were only submitted in 2013, long after the applications for OC were
submitted, and hence had no bearing on the OCs.

II. These two letters of TMC (22.09.2015 & 28.03.2018) clearly show that the
grant of OC was never an issue with TMC [Para 15]: A mere perusal of
these letters would show that the TMC was not issuing the OCs and
 C
had conflated it with the issue of the revised plans, despite the
Appellant’s letter dated 27.03.2015 keeping it separate.

III. The delay of about a decade in obtaining the OC lies with the Developer [Para
21]: This overlooks the continued obduracy of TMC despite repeated
reminders; the Appellant’s compliance of new conditions; the
reduced land area, and the penalty imposed.

The Appellant sent letters dated 20.04.2010, 09.08.2010, 09.09.2011,

24.07.2012, 29.01.2013, 27.03.2015, 01.06.2015, 15.06.2015, 26.11.2018,
29.12.2018, 24.10.2019, 06.12.2019, 02.01.2020, 05.02.2021 and 21.02.2022
seeking the OCs and the plinth certificate. Despite the vigilance of the
Appellant, the NCDRC has penalized it for the delays caused by TMC and
imposed delay compensation amounting to several crores despite having
paid penalty amounts.

The present status of the buildings:

Sr. Name of Commencement Date of Date of first Date of

No. Building Certificate (“CC”) possession OC Grant of OC
(No. of by TMC Application
Flats)
1. Orchid 07.11.2007 _ _ 04.08.2010
(82 flats)
2. Angelica 07.11.2007 May 2010 20.04.2010 21.03.2023
(77 flats)
3. Hollyhock 28.05.2008 May 2011 09.09.2011 21.03.2023
(77 flats)
4. Winter 20.08.2009 2012 29.01.2013 Awaited
Garden
(108 flats)
The various roadblocks and illegal demands by the TMC are liable for the D
delay:

A. Permission from the ULC

i. That as mentioned in the table (supra), the Appellant had sought for an
OC for Building No. 2 on 20.04.2010 itself. A reminder was sent by the
Appellant on 09.09.2011 together with a request for an OC w.r.t. Building
No. 3 as well to TMC;

ii. That the TMC sought to reply to the aforesaid request only on 23.07.2012
i.e., after more than two years. Further, the TMC erroneously sought to
contend that NOC/ permission was required from the ULC Department;

iii. That on the very next day i.e., on 24.07.2012 itself, the Appellant
intimated the TMC that their Application for grant of OC to Building
Nos. 2 – 4 had been complete in all respects in 2010 itself and there was
no requirement for an NOC from the ULC Department at that stage;

iv. However, the TMC continued to insist for a NOC from the ULC
Department by virtue of their letter dated 27.08.2012;

v. In view of the wholly illegal demand of the TMC, the Appellant was
constrained to file a Writ Petition bearing W.P. No.178 of 2013 before the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court, inter alia, seeking to quash the letters dated
23.07.2012 & 27.08.2012 issued by the TMC (supra) and also sought for a
declaration that the OC for the Building Nos. 2, 3 and 4 is deemed to have
been sanctioned as per Regulation 37 of the Development Control
Regulations, 1997.
vi. The fact that no NOC was required from the ULC Department is evident
E
from the fact that eventually the OC was issued for Building Nos. 2 & 3
on 21.03.2023 i.e., after 12 years, without any NOC from the ULC
Department.

B. Permission from MHADA

i. TMC sought to unilaterally impose a condition for NOC from the

Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (“MHADA”) by
virtue of its letter dated 16.08.2014;

ii. MHADA granted a NOC to TMC only on 24.03.2015 & 23.03.2016;

iii. Despite the aforesaid NOC of MHADA, by virtue of their letter dated
12.07.2022, the TMC now ought to contend that the said Project was
affected by MHADA inclusive Housing Reservation;

iv. By virtue of its letters dated 12.01.2023 the Appellant was constrained to
object to the fresh demand imposed by the TMC and reiterated its request
for an OC for at least Building Nos. 2 & 3, but to no avail;

v. The Appellant was hence, constrained to file W.P. 285 of 2023 inter alia,
seeking to challenge the communication dated 12.07.2022 issued by the
TMC (supra);

vi. That it was only on 10.03.2023 that the TMC “basically” approved the OC
for Building Nos. 2 & 3 and by virtue of a separate communication of the
same date, sought explanation of the State Government as well; and

vii. It was only pursuant thereto that the TMC issued OC for Building Nos. 2
& 3 on 21.03.2023.
 C. Payment of penalty F
i. By letter dated 15.06.2015 to the Urban Development Minister, the
Appellant protested the unnecessary delays by the TMC. The Appellant
submitted it would be willing to pay the TMC’s penalty subject to the
final outcome of W.P. No. 178 of 2013;

ii. Based on this, the Minister on 10.07.2015 directed the TMC to evaluate
the purported penalty as per ready reckoner rate till date of Application
of OC;

iii. By letter dated 22.09.2015, the TMC sought to invoke a huge sum of Rs.
7.02 crores as “charges” for issuing the OC for Building Nos. 2 – 4 and
Plinth Certificate, which included Rs. 95.36 lakhs towards ‘Labour
Welfare Tax’;
iv. By its letter dated 26.02.2016, the Appellant sought details on the
bifurcation of the purported charges contained in the aforesaid letter
dated 22.09.2015 issued by the TMC;

v. By letters dated 10.10.2017 and 26.03.2018 the Appellant expressed

willingness to pay the ‘charges’ as sought for by the TMC;

vi. It was only on 28.03.2018 that the TMC dropped the demand to pay the
aforesaid ‘Labour Welfare Tax’ of Rs. 95.36 Lakhs;

vii. Thereupon, the Appellant promptly paid all the charges totalling to Rs
6,77,50,509 alongwith interest in time to the TMC in instalments as
demanded;

Hence, the present Civil Appeal, with an Application seeking a stay of the
judgement.
 LIST OF DATES
G
DATE PARTICULARS

In 1989 That pursuant to the proceedings under the Urban Land Ceiling
Act (“ULC Act”), 40% of a larger piece of land was allotted to
M/s. D. Dayabhai & Co./ Proforma Respondent No. 167 and the
balance land i.e., 60% was allotted to Maharashtra Housing and
Area Development Authority (“MHADA”). The Property that fell
to the share of D. Dayabhai & Co./ Proforma Respondent No. 167
was as follows: -

a) 12730.90 sq. mtrs. out of Gat No. 59/ 2 – Gat No. 59/2B/1A;
b) 20110 sq. mtrs. out of Gat No. 59/ 3; and
c) 2747.50 sq. mtrs. out of Gat No. 59/16 0 Gat No. 59/ 16B-1

20.05.2005 Pursuant to a Development Agreement, the Appellant was

assigned development rights w.r.t. the above-mentioned land ad-
measuring 35,588.40 sq. mtrs. by M/s. D. Dayabhai & Co./
Proforma Respondent No. 167 (hereinafter referred to as “the said
land”).

Note: The Appellant ‘M/s Cosmos Constructions’ is a

Partnership Firm and is engaged in the business of development,
construction, redevelopment of residential and commercial
projects.

2006 The Appellant obtained Commencement Certificates/ Building

onwards Permissions to build on the said Land.
 H
21.07.2009 A dispute regarding tenancy on the said Land was taken up to
the Hon’ble High Court, which disposed off Writ Petition No.
5665 of 2009 filed by M/s. D. Dayabhai& Co./ Proforma
Respondent No. 167, inter alia, holding as under: -

“3. It is well settled that on acquisition the land which is to come

to the Government has to be free from all encumbrances.
Therefore, the 60% of land which is to come to the Government
has to be free from all encumbrances and therefore the
encumbrances of tenant cannot be foisted upon the land which
has come to the share of the Government under the settlement. If
we try to interpret the settlement between the parties, in a
manner which the petitioner-company desire, the Petitioner-
Company gets 40% land plus land of the tenant which would be
contrary to the decision taken by the Government. One thing is
certain that under the settlement, the Government must get 60%
land free from all encumbrances and, therefore, the whole attempt
to foist the encumbrances of the tenant upon the land of the
Government, which is ultimately given to MHADA, is
something which we do not appreciate because the Government
in good spirit, considering the difficulty of the landlord, has
settled the matter with allotment in the ratio of 60:40. Thereafter
again foisting encumbrances of the tenant upon the land of the
Government cannot be countenanced. To that extent we are of
the view that the Petition as filed is not bonafide.
4. The Petitioner has also challenged the reservation in the
development plan in favour of MHADA. We find that the said
reservation has been imposed by following proper procedure
under the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act 1966.
Apart from that, nothing has been pointed out to us by the
learned counsel for the Petitioner to show in what manner the
said reservation is bad and illegal. Therefore, so far as the
challenge to the reservation in favour of MHADA is concerned,
we do not find any substance in the said challenge. The
Petitioners proposal for development has been rejected in view of
the reservation in favour of MHADA. As indicated above, the
area of 8000 sq. mtrs which is to go to the tenant, would have to
be form the 40% land allotted to the Petitioner. Therefore, once
the Petitioner hands over the said land of 8000 sq. mtrs there
should not be any impediment in considering the petitioner’s
proposal for development in respect of the balance of the plot in
its possession. We, therefore do not find any merit in the above
Petition which is accordingly dismissed.”
 I
Note: In compliance of the aforesaid Order, an area totalling to
8000 sq. mtrs. from out of the said land (i.e., 35,588.40 sq. mtrs.)
was kept aside as MHADA reserved land.

It was only thereafter that a Development Proposal for residential

project known as ‘COSMOS LOUNGE’ (hereinafter referred as
“the said Project”), was sanctioned on a portion of the said land
ad-measuring 26,080 sq. mtrs.

Note 1: 8,000 sq. mtrs. of the said land referred to in the Order
dated 21.07.2009 (supra) was not part of the said Project.

Note 2: The Appellant envisaged construction of the following (4)

buildings: -

1) Building No. 1 – Orchid (82 flats)

2) Building No. 2 – Angelica (77 flats)
3) Building No. 3 – Hollyhock (77 flats)
4) Building No. 4 – Winter Garden (108 flats)

20.04.2010 That the Appellant made an application to the Thane Municipal

Corporation (“TMC”) for issuance of Occupation Certificate
(“OC”) for Building No. 2 i.e., Angelica.

04.08.2010 Meanwhile, the OC for Building No. 1 i.e., Orchid was granted by
the TMC, and the Appellant entered into Sale Agreement at
various occasions with various flat buyers.
 Note: It is pertinent to note that initial building permissions (i.e.,
J
Commencement Certificate/ Sanction Plan etc.) were granted
unconditionally to the Appellant. Pertinently, the Appellant
executed Agreements to Sell with the Flatowners only after
obtaining CC for all the four Buildings. At the time, there was no
occasion/ reason for the Appellant to apprehend any delay in
obtaining the OC for Buildings Nos. 2 – 4. Hence, possession of
Flats in Building Nos. 2 – 4 were also handed over to the
Respondents.

27.08.2010 That the Flatowners were aware right from the inception that the
Appellant eventually desired to building additional Buildings in
the said Project (i.e., apart from Building Nos. 1 – 4). The entire
plan including the additional Buildings was shown to the
Flatowners and was in fact, even included in the Brochure issued
by the Appellant. Further, the Agreements to Sale executed
between the Flatowners and the Appellant contained detailed
terms and conditions wherein amalgamation of the plots and
utilization of additional FSI was contemplated. Indemnity Bonds
were also executed by the Flatowners in this regard.

The relevant portion from the Agreement to Sale between the

Appellant and one of the flat purchasers are extracted
hereinbelow for ready reference: -
“…
…
AND WHEREAS the Promoters have disclosed/shown to the
Purchaser/s the entire approved plans of contemplating
construction of several building and as such Purchasers is/are
well aware of the fact that development of the said property
comprises of the development project, which shall be done In
phase-wise manner and as such, the Promoters may make as
and when required amendment to the said presently approved
plans and/or shall make re-location of the layout of the said
development scheme in their sole discretion by obtaining due
K
approval thereto from the said Corporation;

25) The Purchaser/s doth hereby declare and covenant with the
Promoters that he/she/they shall not treated any obstruction or
objection for utilizing any additional floor space index and/or
other benefits in terms of FSI and/or TDR while developing the
said property and/or any time even after completion of the
present development scheme in respect of the said property and
as such, the Promoters, shall be entitled to make use of all such
additional/balance FSI and/or other benefits, exemptions, etc.
in respect of the said property and by utilizing such
FSI/benefits/exemption shall be entitled to carry on and
construct/erect any additional upper floors in addition to the
presently proposed upper floors and/or carry on the erection of
any other structure, building/s In and over the said property
and/or to alienate and transfer/dispose off all the premises,
units, flats, etc. that shall be situated In such additional
floors/structures to any person of their choice upon such terms
and conditions and for such consideration as may be deem fit
and proper by the Promoters In their sole discretion.

32) The Promoters shall take all necessary steps to convey the
said property to the such co-op. housing society/association or
apex body which is to be formed in the abovementioned
manner, however, the Promoters shall not be liable to convey
the said property to such society/association or apex body
unless and until the development of the said property by
utilizing full FSI thereof, at present available and/or which
shall be available in future is utilized and consumed and/or the
FSI that shall become available by way of T.D.R. or due to
amalgamation is utilized and consumed; and all the flats,
premises, to be situated in the said building are sold and
transferred and amount due from such flat Purchasers are
fully and completely paid by them and/or each of them, to the
Promoters. Till then neither the Purchaser nor the
Society/Association of the Purchaser/Apex body etc. shall be
entitled to make demand for the Conveyance in their favour
from the Promoter and/or the Owner/Confirming Party.
While executing such conveyance, the Purchaser/s shall be
liable alongwith the other flat takers of the said building for the
payment of his/her/its/their proportionate share In the stamp
duty and registration charges the shall be payable on such
conveyance.
 … L
34) The Purchaser/s shall at no time demand partition of
his/her/its/their interest in the said building and/or the said
property, it being agreed and declared by the Purchaser/s that
his/her/its/their interest in the said premises is importable.

41) The Promoters shall be entitled to amalgamate the said

property with the adjoining or neighbourhood properties and
by such amalgamation, shall be entitled to make use of
additional FSI for constructing additional floors on the said
building and/or any other structures/buildings In the said
property and/or shall also be entitled to obtain and acquire
T.D.R. of any other properties for construction of additional
upper floors on the building to be constructed on the said
property and for that purpose, further shall be entitled to make
required amendment and/or modifications in the said approved
plans and shall fur approval to such
amendment/modification/revision from the said Corporation
without seeking any separate approval/consent/permission
from the purchaser/s herein; and in fact, this clause itself shall
be as such permission/consent.”.

09.09.2011 Thereafter, the Appellant made several reminders to the TMC for
issuance of OC for the Building No. 2 as well as for the Building
No. 3 and Plinth Certificate of the Club House.

12.04.2012 In proceedings held under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land

Revenue Act, 1966, a further area of 8,000 sq. mtrs. was reduced
from the said land.

Note: Hence, on the said land which initially totaled 35,588.40 sq.
mtrs., the situation on the ground was: -
i. An area of 8,000 sq. mtrs. was reserved for MHADA in
terms of the Hon’ble High Court Order dated 21.07.2009
(supra); and
 M
ii. A further area of 8,000 sq. mtrs. was reduced in terms of
the aforesaid Order dated 12.04.2012.

23.07.2012 That the TMC sought to reply to the Appellant’s letter dated
20.04.2010 only on 23.07.2012 i.e., after more than two years.
Further, the TMC erroneously sought to contend that NOC/
permission was required from the ULC Department.

24.07.2012 In reply thereto, the Appellant was constrained to note as under:

-
“2. … As mentioned in your letter, we would like to state that
demand for NOC from ULC authorities was never a condition
till now, though our application for Occupation Certificate
was pending with the TMC since 2010. You are aware that the
issue with regard to validity of development schemes which
were initially approved u/s 20 & 21 of the erstwhile ULC act
is pending for decision in the Supreme Court. As mentioned
in your letter, NOC from the ULC authorities is not related to
the issue pertaining to grant of Occupation Certificate and the
said condition cannot be a precondition for grant of
Occupation Certificate. …
…
…
5. We therefore hereby request you to withdraw your letter
dated 23.07.2012 in order to avoid creating further
unwarranted complications in the matter. Without prejudice
to our rights and contentions, we once again request you to
grant necessary permissions for enabling the water-
department for providing municipal water-supply to the
building Nos. 2 & 3 of the V.P. No. 2005/160 and also for
assessing the said building as authorized structures.”
27.08.2012 The TMC, however, continued to insist for a NOC from the ULC
N
Department inter alia, as under:

“… No objection certificate/permission from U.L.C

Department and after submission of the extension of order
dated 27/1/89 by ULC the department, the proposal for revised
maps and use permit will be considered.”

11.01.2013 Meanwhile, Late Mr. Suraj Ramesh Parmar, who was a Partner of
the Appellant Firm, was constrained to give an undertaking that
the issue in respect of the OC would be resolved soon as under: -

“…

2. I state that the construction of the said building is done as

per the sanctioned plans and all other NOC's for grant of
Occupation Certificate have been obtained from all concerned
Departments of Thane Municipal Corporation and requisite
application dated 20/04/2010 for grant of Occupation
Certificate have been submitted on 09/08/2010 for the said
building before Thane Municipal Corporation.

3. 1 state that as such according to the Development Control

Rules for the City of Thane, the Occupation Certificate for the
said building i.e. Building Angelica is deemed to be granted on
22.09.2010.

4. I further state that we hereby undertake to resolve the issue

regarding Occupation Certificate in respect of the said
building and are in process of filing a Writ Petition in Hon’ble
High Court, Bombay.”

January In view of the wholly illegal demand of the TMC, the Appellant
2013 was constrained to file a Writ Petition bearing W.P. No. 178 of
2013 before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, inter alia, seeking
the following reliefs: -

“a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of

Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
Writ, Order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution
O
of India for
(i) quashing and setting aside Government Resolution
dated 23rd November 2007

(ii) quashing and setting aside part of the Government

Resolution dated 15th October 1997 to the extent of it’s
applicability only to the schemes approved on or after 31st
January 1990

(iii) granting benefit of Government Resolution dated 15th

October 1997 to the Petitioner as prayed in application
dated 8th February 2007

(iv) quashing and setting aside impugned Order dated

12th September 2012 passed by the Respondent No. 1 and
24th September 2012 passed by Respondent No. 2

(v) directing the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to issue

appropriate Order thereby amending Order dated 27th
January 1989 and restrict allotment of flats to
Government Nominees upto 5% and grant extension of
time to implement the scheme approved by Order dated
27th January 1989 under section 20 (1) of the said ULC
Act 1976 and extended by Order dated 7th June 2004.

(vi) quashing and setting aside letter dated 23rd July 2012
and letter dated 27th August 2012 issued by Respondent
No.3/Corporation.

(vii) declaring that in view of Regulation No. 37 of the

Development Control Regulations 1984 occupation
 P
certificate for building nos. 2 and 3 is deemed to have been
granted and direct Respondent No. 3/Corporation to
grant and issue occupation certificate for building nos. 2
as per application dated 20th April 2010 submitted on 9th
August 2010 for building nos. 2 and application dated 9th
September 2011 for building No. 3”

29.01.2013 The Appellant also made an Application to TMC for OC for

Building No. 4.

18.03.2013 As things stood, the Appellant by virtue of its letters dated

18.03.2013 & 18.11.2013 sought approval for amended plans for
the development of its balance plot by amalgamating the same
with land comprising VP No. 2005/160 (i.e., the portion of the
said Land where the 4 buildings had already been constructed)
and by loading the FSI of the aforesaid Balance Plot in VP No.
2005/160.

Note: A reminder for the same was also sent to TMC for the
aforesaid approval on 18.11.2013.

16.08.2014 That at this stage, TMC sought to unilaterally impose a condition

for NOC from MHADA.

24.03.2015 MHADA granted a NOC to TMC.

Note: This was followed by a similar communication dated

23.03.2016 issued by MHADA.
 Q
15.06.2015 The Appellant was constrained to raise a protest to the Hon’ble
Urban Development Minister, State Government due to the
unnecessary delays in granting permissions by the TMC. The
Appellant also submitted that TMC was contemplating charging
penalty for grating OC for the said Project. The Appellant
submitted that even though they were not liable to pay any
penalty whatsover, it would be willing to pay the penalty subject
to the final outcome of W.P. No. 178 of 2013 filed by it before the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court (supra);

10.07.2015 That on the basis of the aforesaid representation, the Hon’ble

Minister directed the TMC to evaluate the purported penalty as
per ready reckoner rate till date of Application of OC for
buildings in the said Project;

22.09.2015 Thereupon, the TMC sought to invoke a huge sum totalling to Rs.
7.02 crores as “charges” for issuing the OC for Building Nos. 2 –
4. The aforesaid sum included a sum of Rs. 95.36 lakhs towards
‘Labour Welfare Tax’;

26.02.2016 The Appellant sought details on the bifurcation of the purported

charges contained in the aforesaid letter dated 22.09.2015 issued
by the TMC.

Note: Further, by virtue of its letters dated 07.02.2017, 16.02.2017,

27.02.2017, 10.10.2017 and 26.03.2018 the Appellant expressed its
willingness to pay the ‘charges’ as sought for by the TMC albeit
in installments;
 R
02.03.2016 Thereafter, the Appellant wrote a letter to the Cooperative
Housing Society of Building Nos., 2, 3 & 4 apprising them about
the prevailing difficulty in obtaining Occupancy Certificate.

Note: The Appellant always acted in a bona fide manner and at no

point of time intended to hide anything from the Respondent Flat
owners.

27.11.2017 Whilst things stood thus, the Respondents filed a Consumer

Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld. National
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, inter alia, praying for
the following reliefs:

“a) The Opponents be directed to furnish occupancy certificate

and execute conveyance. The Opponents be directed to pay
compensation @ of Rs. 500/- per day to each flat purchaser
from the date of formation of society till execution of
conveyance as per the list filed at Exh “C”.

b) The Opponents be directed to construct club house equipped

with latest gym equipments, squash court, pool table and table
tennis.

c) The Opponents be directed to properly construct the

swimming pool along with all the necessary set up as described
in paragraph no. (V)(4)(A) of complaint application.

d) The Opponents be directed to pay an interest @18% on Rs.

20,000/- to each flat purchaser from the date of payment till
construction of club house.
 S
e) The opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2 Lacs
along with interest @18% as narrated in paragraph no. (V)(4)
A of complaint.

f) The Opponents be directed to provide amphitheatre as

mentioned in Annexure N of agreement to sale.

g) The Opponents be directed to construct permanent gate,

security cabin and fence at the entrance as prayed in paragraph
no (V)(4)(C)

h) The Opponents be directed to make necessary provision

ensuring that the water tanks meant for hollyhock society and
winter garden society are filled simultaneously by the overflow
from fire water tank.

i) The opponents be directed to complete the internal repairs

and plastering of domestic water tanks with due finishing as
per standard practice. The opponents be also directed to clean
remove the debris lying in the water tanks and ensure they are
clean and free of debris and foreign bodies.
j) The Opponents be directed to enclose the power substation
as prayed in paragraph no. (V)(4)(E)

k) The Opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5000/-

per flat purchaser by way of compensation for the mental and
physical harassment caused to them.

l) The Opponents be directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- by way of

Cost of litigation. …”
 T
13.12.2017 The Ld. Commission while admitting the complaint filed by the
Respondents, was please to pass, inter alia, the following orders:

“Admit.

Issue notice of the admitted complaint to the opposite parties,

asking them to file their written version within the time
prescribed under section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act,
1986.

Issue notice to the opposite parties on the application under

section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act as well. …”

28.03.2018 TMC dropped the demand to pay the ‘Labour Welfare Tax’
whereupon he Appellant timely paid charges totalling to Rs. 6.77
crores to the TMC.

06.04.2018 The Appellant filed its reply to the application under Section
12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by the
Respondents in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of
2017 before the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission.

08.05.2018 The Appellant again wrote a letter to the aforesaid Housing

Society, requesting for a meeting in order to get the pending
issues resolved.

28.09.2018 Furthermore, the Counsel appearing for the Appellant in C.C.

No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld. Commission made a suggestion
to grant an opportunity to the parties to settle the matter
amicably.
 U
The Ld. Commission while accepting the suggestion, inter alia,
passed the following orders:

“The learned Senior Counsel further submits that one chance

for voluntary amicable settlement be given, as the issue could
be voluntarily and amicably resolved.
In our considered view, let both the parties try for a voluntary
amicable settlement within a period of eight weeks. ..”

29.10.2018 The Respondents filed the amended complaint and the revised
application under section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection
Act, 1986 in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of
2017 before the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission, inter alia¸ praying as under: -

“a) The Opponents be directed to furnish occupancy certificate

and execute conveyance. The Opponents be directed to pay
compensation @ of Rs. 500/- per day to each complainant from
the date of formation of society till execution of conveyance as
per the list filed at Exh “C”.

b) The Opponents be directed to construct club house equipped

with latest gym equipments, squash court, pool table and table
tennis.

c) The Opponents be directed to properly construct the

swimming pool along with all the necessary set up as described
in paragraph no. (V)(4)(A) of complaint application.
 V
d) The Opponents be directed to pay an interest @18% on Rs.
20,000/- to each Complainant from the date of payment till
construction of club house.

e) The opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2 Lacs

along with interest @18% as narrated in paragraph no. (V)(4)
A of complaint.

f) The Opponents be directed to provide amphitheatre as

mentioned in Annexure N of agreement to sale.

g) The Opponents be directed to construct permanent gate,

security cabin and fence at the entrance as prayed in paragraph
no (V)(4)(C)

h) The Opponents be directed to make necessary provision

ensuring that the water tanks meant for hollyhock society and
winter garden society are filled simultaneously by the overflow
from fire water tank.

i) The opponents be directed to complete the internal repairs

and plastering of domestic water tanks with due finishing as
per standard practice. The opponents be also directed to clean
remove the debris lying in the water tanks and ensure they are
clean and free of debris and foreign bodies.

j) The Opponents be directed to enclose the power substation

as prayed in paragraph no. (V)(4)(E)

k) The Opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5000/-

per Complaint by way of compensation for the mental and
physical harassment caused to them.
 W
l) The Opponents be directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- by way of
Cost of litigation. …”

03.11.2018 The Appellant thereafter filed its reply to the Amended Petition
filed by the Respondents in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC
No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld. National Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission.

26.11.2018 Meanwhile an application for grant of Occupation Certificate for

Building Nos. 2, 3 & 4 and Plinth Certificate of Club House was
filed by the Architect and also on 29.12.2018.

05.12.2018 The parties could not arrive at any settlement. However, the
Counsel for the Appellant submitted before the Hon’ble
Commission that efforts for procuring the occupation certificate
is on and the same shall be ready within a month and will be
provided in a short time.

Upon hearing the submissions, the Hon’ble Commission was

please to allow the application filed under Section 12 (1) (C) by
the Respondents and, inter alia, passed the following orders:

“…3. Heard the arguments on the application under Section

12 (1) (c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The
requirement under Section 12 (1) (c) is fulfilled in this case.
Accordingly permission for a public notice in terms of Section
13 (6) of the Act, 1986 read with Order 1 Rule 8 CPC be
published in newspapers – ‘The Times of India’ (English), and
‘Maharashtra Times’ (Marathi), both stated to be published
from and circulated in Mumbai, for 06.03.2019. The public
notice shall be published in the font size ‘11’ or a bigger font
size. The application stands disposed of.
 CC/3505/2017
X
4. Consequent to grant of permission u/s 12 (1)(c) of the
Act, 1986 the complaint is admitted, subject to just exceptions.
..”

08.08.2019 In pursuant to the direction passed by the Ld. Commission, the

Respondents filed their Rejoinder Affidavit in the Consumer
Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017 before the Hon’ble
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

24.10.2019 An application for grant of Occupation certificate for Building

Nos. 2,3,4 and Plinth Certificate of Club House was filed by the
Architect followed by reminders dated 06.12.2019, 02.01.2020,
05.02.2021 & 27.05.2021.

13.01.2020 Also, an I.A. No. 15474 of 2019 for Impleadment was filed in the
Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld.
Commission by some 40 persons. Accordingly, the Impleadment
application was allowed and the parties were directed to be
included in the list of complainants.

18.01.2021 Thereafter the Respondents filed their affidavit of evidence in the

Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017 before the
Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

16.02.2022 Another application bearing IA No. 1962 of 2021 was filed,

seeking impleadment in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC
No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld. National Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission.
 Y
The Ld. Commission was pleased to allow the Applicants and
were permitted to be impleaded as Complainants in the
Complaint.

04.05.2022 An Application for grant of OC for Building Nos. 2, 3 & 4 and

Plinth Certificate for Club House was filed by Architect to the
TMC.

12.07.2022 Meanwhile, the application for grant of Occupation Certificate for

Building Nos. 2, 3 & 4 and Plinth Certificate of Club House was
not approved by the Statutory Authority.

17.12.2022 Thereafter, being aggrieved by the rejection of the Occupation

Certificate, the Appellant herein field the Writ Petition bearing
W.P. No. 285 of 2023 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature
at Bombay challenging the order of dated 12.07.2022, inter alia,
praying as under: -

“(a) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of

certiorari or a Writ in the nature of certiorari or any other
appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, thereby quashing and setting aside
condition no 1 imposed by the Respondent vide
communication/ letter/order dated 12 July 2022 (Exhibit K
hereto) thereby directing the Petitioner to submit building
proposal after considering the land use as MHADA Housing
Site 'A in respect of plots of land bearing Survey No 59/A
Hissa No 2/G/2/1 and Gat No 59/A Hissa No 2/H situated at
Chitalsar, Manpada, Taluka and Dist Thane vide
Development Proposal No 2005/160;
 Z
(b) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of
Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
appropriate Writ, Order or Direction Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, thereby directing the Respondent to
forthwith approve the revised Building Proposal dated 21
February 2022 and 4 May 2022 submitted by the Petitioner
vide Development Proposal No 2005/160 in respect of land
situated on Gat No 59A, Hissa 3B/1/1, 3B/1/2A, 3B/1/2B,
3B/1/2C, 3B/2/1, 3B/4/1, 3B/5, l6/3B/6, 2H, 2/G/2/1, 2/G/2/2,
16B/2/1/2/1, 16B/2/1/2/2 at Village Chithalsar, Manpada,
Thane without insisting for submission of Development
Proposal after considering land use as MHADA Housing Site
‘A’ as mentioned in condition no 1 of impugned
communication/letter dated 12 July 2022;

(c) that during the pendency and till final disposal of this Writ
Petition, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the
Respondent to undertake the process of the Building Plans
submitted by the Petitioner in terms of the Representation
made by the Petitioner;

04.01.2023 Furthermore, the Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant

informed the Ld. Commission that the Application for the
Occupation Certificate had been rejected by the Statutory
Authority vide Order dated 12.07.2022 and the same has been
challenged before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at
Bombay.

The Ld. Commission was pleased to pass inter alia the following
order:
 AA
“Counsel for OP informs that Occupation Certificate has been
rejected by the Statutory Authority by order dated 12.7.2022.
OP has challenged the order before the High Court. He may
produce the copy of rejection as well as copy of Writ Petition
alongwith affidavit, within two weeks …”

21.03.2023 Meanwhile, the Occupation Certificate for Building Nos. 2 and 3

was granted as well as Plinth certificate for the Club House.

NOTE: - The Occupation Certificate in respect of Building No. 4

continues to remain pending till date.

12.06.2023 By virtue of the Impugned Final Judgement and Order, The Ld.
Commission has erroneously allowed the Complaint filed by the
Respondents in part, inter alia with the following directions to the
Appellant: -
“…
26. In view of the discussion above, the Consumer Complaint
is partly allowed with the following directions to the Opposite
Parties to: -

“A. Obtain the Occupation Certificate for Building No.4

(Winter Garden) within four months of this Order by filing
application for its grant with concerned authority exclusively
for Building No.4 and the club house;

B. Pay the Complainants/ allottees of Building Nos.2&3

(Angelica and Hollyhock respectively) a delay compensation @
Rs.2.0 lakhs each, within a period of four months, failing which
an interest rate of 6% p.a. would be levied on this amount from
the date of this Order;

C. Pay a delay compensation of Rs.2.0 lakhs to the

Complainants/ allottees of Building No.4 within four months
of this Order, failing which an interest rate of 6% per annum
would be payable on this amount from the date of this Order;
 D. In case of delay of obtaining the Occupation Certificate for
BB
Building No.4 (Winter Garden), beyond four months, the
Complainants/ allottees of this Building shall be paid delay
compensation @ 6% per annum on their deposited amount
from respective dates of taking possession till the grant of
Occupation Certificate. The amount of Rs.2.0 lakhs already
paid as per Order above at (C) shall be adjusted from this
amount to be paid;

E. complete the construction of the club house within six

months, failing which a delay compensation @ 6% per annum
on the deposited amount for the club house by the allottees,
shall be payable from the date of this Order;

F. Complete all the amenities as given in Agreement for Sale

within six months.

27. On compliance of the Order as contained in the preceding

paragraph 26 sub-paras A to E, the Complainants/ allottees of
the four buildings shall give their consent letter (NOC) for
further construction by the Opposite Parties, within one
month of such request by the Opposite Parties, provided such
construction fulfills the condition of MOFA, Building
Regulations of Thane Municipal Corporation, Unified
Development Control Rules and the permissible Floor Space
Index.”

31.07.2023 Hence, the present Civil Appeal

 1
i

• • -

v...·••��····•

<�t���No. :011-24608801-04 Upbhokta Nyay Bhawan

�

' x No.: 011-24651505 'F'- Block,

r,.: ail: ncdrc[at]nic[dot]in General Pool Office Complex,
Website: www.ncdrc.nic.in INA, NEW DELHI- 110023
\\
Consumer Case No. 3505/2017

APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & 5 ORS. ..... Petitioner/Appellant

Versus
..... Opposite
MIS. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS & ANR.
Party/Respondent(s)
To
Complainant/ Petitioner/ Appellant Name:

1 Mrs. Apama Deepak Pande 2 Mr. Yashawant Balakrsihna Shinde

r/o 178, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, r/o 17B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra. Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

3) Mr. Kishor Shamrao Kumbhare 4) Mr 8alasaheb Anandrao Babar

r/o 19A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 1 A, Winter Gargen CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.
5) Mr Prodipta Banerjee 6) Mr Amar A. Chakote
r/o 6D, Angelica CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, r/o 188, Angilica CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra. Manpad Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

7) Ms. Priyanka Shrivalkar 8) Mr Bhishan Rane

r/o 1-C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 2F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra

9) Mr Santosh Prabhakar Roundha I 10) Mr Rajendra M. More

r/o 3A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 38, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge,' Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

11) Mr Sudhir Krishna Ghosalkar 12) Mr Ashish Ghadi

r/o 3C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 3E, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

13) Mr Ramakant Govind Lahar 14) Ms Anuradha A Kachare

r/o. 4A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 4C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.
-
15) Mr Rahul Dattatraya Chaoji 16) Ms Shruti 8ugdane
r/o SA, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o SC, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. I Maharashtra.
L ------�- - - -------- --····--·····----�- i - -----
 2
l
17) Mr Lavlesh Singh 18) Mr Bhaskar Karbhari Nale
I
r/o Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
6A, r/o 68, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Tha ne West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra
19) Mr Rajendra Shety 2O) Mr Sharad Sambaji Narvekar
r/o6F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, r/o 7C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra. Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

21) Mr Avinash Kamalkar Kharshikar 221Mr Mohit Agarwal

r/o 8A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 8BWinter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.
Maharashtra.
23) Ms Maya Ravikumar 24l, Mr Kishor Parshuram Bandavalkar
rf o 9A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o98, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.
Maharashtra.

25) Mr Rahul Chame 26) Mr Sachin Rameshrao Nandeshwar

rf o 9C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 9E, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Lounge, Manpada, S Thane West-4ffi601, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.
Maharashtra.
271Mr Nitin G. Bawankule 28) Mr Pravin Vilas Khande
r/o l2A, Winter Garden-GHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 72C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40O6O1, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40O6O1,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.
29) Mr Pankaj Sudhkar Patil 30) Ms Ruchira Abhay Chalke
r/o 12E, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o'1,3A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West4OO6O1, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West4CD6O1,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

31) Ms Prisha Vishal Bathija 32) Mr Amit Kumar Singh

rf o 14A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, C-osmos r/o 14D, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Ma n pada, Thane West-4(X)601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West4OO5Ol,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

33) Mr Anant VWarde 34) Mr Sandeep Nakul Das

r/o Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosrnos
LGF, r/o 17A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
.
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-4OO6O1, Manpada,'Thane West40O5O1,
Lou nge,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

35) Mr Rameshwar Lal 36) Mr Suresh Pathak

r/o l9F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o2OA, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40o601, Lounge, Manpada,' Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra

37) Mr Sunil K. Nair 38) Mr Premkumar Ratta

rf o LA, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o lB, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400501, Lounge, Ma npada, Thane West-4@601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.
39) Ms Anupama Ratta 40) Mr Siddharth Pendharkar
rf o 7C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o2A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
LoungeMa npada, Thane West-400601, LoungeMa npada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.
 3
I a1) Mr Nirmal Deb 42lMr Amol R Patil
r/o 28, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos rf o2C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400501, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40Q601,
Maharashtra Maharashtra.

43) Mr Krishnakumar B Nair 44) Mr Charanjeet Singh Katorode

rlo 2D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o3A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada,Thane West-400601, Lounge Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

45) Mr Narendra M Pawar 46) Mr Ashish Salvi

r/o4A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos rf o 48, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Ma npada, Thane West-40o601, Lounge, Manpada, Tha ne West-40o501,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

47) Mr Deva a8) Mr VR Gopakumar

o 4C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
rf rf o 4O, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Tha ne West-4@601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra

49) Mr Pramod Dahat 50) Ms PranaliAmare

rf o5A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Lounge, rf o 58, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra Lounge, Manpada,Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra.

51) Mr Vinayak M Khandeparkar 52) Mr Sharad Kumar

rf o 5D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 6A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Tha ne West-400501, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40o601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

53) Mr Brijesh. Singh 54) Mr Krishna Shastri

rf o 68, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos rlo 6C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40o601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

55) Mr Rajesh Deshmukh 56) Mr Parag S Naik

rf o 8,A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o9A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thahe West-400601, [.ounge, Manpada, Thane West-4@501,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

57) Mr Sameer P Satere 58)MrTLXavier

rf o 9B., Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos clo9C,Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West400601, Lourge, Manpada, Thane West-4{D6101,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

59) Mr Kamaljit Singh 60) Ms Latika H. Bhanushali

rloLOB, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/olOC, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-4@601,
Maharashtra Maharashtra.

61) Mr Nallapati Ranga Rao 62) Mr Vilas Shinde

r/o Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
1.OD, rf o L1,a, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.
 4
63) Mr Mahendra Devji Khona 64) Mr Vijay Shastri
r/o I lB, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o LLA, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40060L, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40o601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

65) Mr Dheeraj Goyal 66) Mr Sandesh Nalawade

r/o 7l D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 12A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40o601,
Ma ha rashtra. Maharashtra.

67) Mr Nitin Singh 68) Kiran Shet

r/o 1,2C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o1.3A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Ma npada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-4@601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

69) Mr Ashish Naik 70) Mr Anilkumar Yadav

r/o 1,3C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 748, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40o601,
Thane West-400601., Maharashtra Maharashtra.

71) Mr Biju Cherian 721Mr Prasanna Rajaram Aher

rf o 15A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 158, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West4006o1,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

73) Ms Medha R Chaubal 741Mr Vijay. D Meshram

r/o 75C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o L7A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West40O6O1,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

75) Ms Shraddha G Tulsankar 76) Ms Maneesha M Oke

rf o 178, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 17C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40o601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West40O5O1,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

771 Mr Ashish Kane 78) Mr Kishor Wathe

rlo !8A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o l&C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West4@501,
Maharashtra Maharashtra.

79) Mr Shekhar Jain 80) Mr Sanjay J. Singh

r/o t9A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o79B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-40o501,
Maharashtra Maharashtra.

81) Mr Kutubuddin M Sheikh 82) Mr Satyen Dahriwal

r/o 79D;. Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o 2OC, Angelica Gardert CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Ma npada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West40o501,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

83) Mr Mayank Sharma 84) Ms DipaliSarolkar

rf o 2OD, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o7A, Angelica GardenCHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Ma npada, Thane West-400601, Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra
 85) Mr Hemant Somaiya 86) Mr Sanjay B. Shinde

5
i
r/o 3D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos r/o LA Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Lounge, Ma npada, Tha ne West-400601, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra
Maharashtra
87) Mr Mahesh G Kendhe 88) Mr Hitesh Bawa
r/o 1.8 Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, r/o ZA Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Manpada, Thane West- 400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

89) Mr Ninad Chikhalikar 90) Mr Yogeesh R Shetty

rlo 38 Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, rlo3C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West-400501, Man pada, Thane West-2t00501,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra

91) Mrs Vijayalakshmi Ravi & Ravi Ranganathan 92) Mr Sandeep Shashikant Dani Mrs Deepa S
r/o 48 Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Dani
Manpada, Thane West- 400601, r/o 4C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Maharashtra. Manpada, Thane West- 400501,
Maharashtra.
93) Mr Rahul Karanjawala Mrs Apeksha 94) Mr Manoj Nalliath Mrs Sunanda Manoj
Karanjawala rlo 5A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
r/o 4D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Manpada, Thane West- 40O5O1, Maharashtra Maharashtra.

95) Mr Govind B Savant 96) Mr Souvik Bhattacharya

r/o 58 Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, rlo 5C Hollyhock CHS LtdCosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West- 4@607, Manpada, Thane West- 400601,
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.
97) Mr Ameya A Bhandekar 98) Mr Sandip V. Londhe Mr Abhijit V. Londhe'
r/o 5D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, rlo 6A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada Manpada, Thane West-40o601, Maharashtra.
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.
99) Mr Anand RRajput Mrs Vishali A Rajput 100) Mr Selvin J. Manjaly Mrs Nimmy S.
r/o 76D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manjaly
Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra r/o 7A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra
101) Mr Prakash D. Chipande Mrs Snehal P. 102) Mr Sanjay K. Khare Mts Monica Khare
Chipande' r/o 9A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
r/o BA Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane West- 400601,
Manpada, Thane West- 4m601, Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

103) Mr Suresh S. Malapurath 104) Mr Anuj K. Bhatt Mr KumalA. Bhatt Mr

r/o 98 Hotlyhock CHS Ltd, Ajit P. Bhatt
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada r/o 9C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Thane West-zl(8601, Maharashtra Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra
105) Mr Sukhendu M Patnaik Mrs Subela 106) Mr Pravin M. Spnavane
Patnaik r/o lOC Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
r/o 7OB Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra
Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra
107) Mr Govardhan C. Sharkhane Mrs. Anjana 108) Mr Bhagesh C. Sharma
Sharkhane r/o1,1C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
r/o 10D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane West- 400601,
Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.
Maharashtra.
109) Mr Prasad MadhukarJadiye Mrs Shubhada
P. Jadiye
r/o'I2B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cssmos Lounge,
110) Mrs Malabika Mitra Mr Ashim Dutta
rlo t2C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West-400601, Maharashtra
a
6
Manpada,
Thane West- 4006Q1-; Maharashtra
111) Mrs Manisha S. Sonawane Mr Sandip K. 112) Mr Chirag Panchal Mrs Preet Panchal
Sonavane 1 r/o !3C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
rlo 1.3A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane West- 400601,
Manpada, . . Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.
Maharashtra.
113) Mrs K. Jaya Rambabu 114) Mr Parag Mahajan Mrs Khushbu Mahajan
r/o 1.4C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, r/oLSA Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Lounge,\Manpada, Thane West- 400601,
Maharashtra Maharashtra

115) Mr Girish V. Pawar Mrs Sonali G. Pawar 116) Mr Suhas J Jadhav Mrs. Shubhangi J

r/o L5B Hollyhock CHS Ltd Jadhav

Cosmos Lounge, Manpada r/o LSC Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Thane West- 400601 Manpada, Thane West- 400601
Maharashtra. Maharashtra.

1.17) Mr Sanjay R. Mohite Mrs Sushma S Mohite 118) Mr Anand V. Khanvilkar Mrs Trupti
r/oLSD Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, AKhanvilkar
Manpada, Tha ne West-400601, r/o 16A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Maharashtra. Manpada Thane West- 400601,
Maharashtra-
119) Mrs Sheeta RModi 12O) Mr Amarendra P Singhdeo Mrs Monalisa
r/o 15C Hollyhock CHS Ltd Cosmos Lounge, Singhdeo
Manpada, Thane West-4@601, r/o 16D Hollyhock CHS l-td, Cosmos Lourige,
Maharashtra. Manpada, Thane West- 400601,
Maharashtra.
121) Mr Manoj l Bhandary Mrs Krithika 122) Mr Rakesh R. Modi
Bhandary rlolTC Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
rlo L7A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada Thane West-zKlO6O1,
Manpada, Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra
Maharashtra
123) Mr Parag Desai lZ4lMr Sundip R Pal
r/o L.8A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Mrs. Sancheta S Pal
Manpada Thane West- 400601, r/o 19A Holhyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Maharashtra. Manpada, Thane West- 400601
Maharashtra.
125) Mr Bipin Panchal Mrs Geetha B. Panchal 126) MrArindrajit Datta Mrs Baisali Datta
r/o1-9C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, r/o l9D Hollyhock CHS Ltd Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West-400601 Manpada Thane West- 400601
Maharashtra Maharashtra
7271Mr Jaideep Singh Gadri L28) Mr Nirbhay D. Deshmukh
r/o 2OA Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Mrs Rekha N Deshmukh
Manpada, Thane West- 400601 r/o 2OB Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Maharashtra. Manpada, Thane West- 400601
Maharashtra.
129) Mr Sumit Banerjee Ms Vishaly Rajput
r/o2OD, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada Thane West- 400601
Maharashtra.
 Opposite Party / Respondent Name:
7
M/s C{lsmos Construction 2) Mls Dahyabhai & Co. Pvt. Ltd
Through its Director, Mr Manish Mehta Through AR 1.21, MittalTowers,
Office at Cosmos House, behind TMC office, C-Wing, 12th Floor, Nariman Point
Sant Dnyaneshwar Road, Panchpakhadi, Mumbai
Thane [W]

Sir,
I am directed to forward herervith a certifled copy of the order dated 1210612023 delivered
by the National Commission in the above-mentioned matter for your information and
necessary action.

Please acknowledge receipt.

&
Dated New Delhi, on this 22 June 2A23
CTI FFICER
 8
IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT NEW DELHI

RESERVED ON : 02.05.2023
PRONOUNCED ON: \ L-Of,..-2:---0)_.3,

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 3505 OF 2017

With- IA/5672/2022, IA/1491/2023, lA/4591/2023
.....
·'

1) Mrs. Apama Deepak Pande

r/o 17B, · Hollyhock CHSLtd, CosmosLounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

2) Mr. Yashawant Balakrsihna Shinde

r/o 17B, Hollyhock CHSLtd, CosmosLounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

3) Mr. Kishor ShamraQ Kumbh�e

r/o 19A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, CosmosLounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060-1, ·M-aharashtra.

4) Mr Balasaheb Anandrao Bahar

r/o 1 A, Winter Gargen CHSLtd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

..
 9
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

6) Mr Amar A. Chakote
r/o 18B, Angilica CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

7) Ms. Priyanka Shrivalkar

r/o 1-C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos L01;!1ge, Manpada,
-' .

Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

· 8) Mr Bhishan Rane
r/o 2F, Winter Garden CHS Lt� Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra

9) Mr Santosh Prabhakar Roundhal

r/o 3A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lmmge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 I, Maharashtra.

10) �Rajendra M. More

r/o 3B, Winter Gard�n CHS Lt� �osmos �unge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

I I\) Mr Sudhir Krishna Ghosalkar

r/o 3C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

12) Mr Ashish Ghadi

r/o 3E, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Page 2 of 38 of CC No.3505 of2017

 10

13) Mr Ramakant Govind Lohar

r/o 4A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

14) Ms Anuradha A Kachare

r/o 4C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

15) Mr Rahul Dattatraya Chaoji

r/o 5� Winter Garden CHS Ltd; Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

16) Ms Shruti Bugdane

r/o SC, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

1 7) Mr Lavlesh Singh
r/o 6A, Winter: G�den CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Than� W,est-400601, Mahara:Shtra._

· 18) Mr Bhaskar Katbhari Nale

\ r/o 6B, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manp•
Thane West-40060 I, Maharashtra.
 11
20) Mr Sharad Sambaji Narvekar
r/o 7C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

21) Mr Avinash Kamalkar Kharshikar

r/o 8A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

22) Mr Mohit Agarwal

r/o 8B Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

23) Ms Maya Ravikumar

r/o 9A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lowige, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

24) Mr Kishor Parshuram Bandavalkar

r/o 9B, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

25) Mr Rahul Charne

r/o 9C, Winter Garden�CHS � Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
\ Thane West-400601, Maharashtra. \

26)' Mr Sachin Rameshrao Nandeshwar r/o 9E, Winter Garden

CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-400601,
Maharashtra.

Page 4 of 38 of CC No.3505 of 2017

 12
r/o 12A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

28) Mr Pravin Vilas Khande

r/o 12C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

29) Mr Pankaj Sudhkar Patil

r/o 12E, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

30) Ms Ruchira Abhay Chalke

r/o 13.A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

31) Ms Prisha Vishal Bathija

r/o 14A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

32) Mr Amit Kumar

,
Singh
'

r/o 14D, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Thane W.est--400601, Maharashtra

33) Mr Anant \'Warde

r/o ·16F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

Page 5 of 38 of CC No.3505 of2017

 13
r/o 17A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

35) Mr Rameshwar Lal

r/o l 9F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 I, Maharashtra.

36) Mr Suresh Pathak

r/o 20A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra

3 7) Mr Sunil K. Nair
r/o IA, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 I, Maharashtra.

38) Mr Premkumar Ratta

r/o 1B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

39) Ms Anupama �
r/o IC, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos LoungeManpada,
Thane W�-400601, Maharashtra

40) Mr Siddharth Pendharkar

r/o 2A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos LoungeManpada,
Thane West-40060 I, Maharashtra.

41) Mr Nirmal Deb

Page 6 of 38 of CC No.3505 of 2017

 a
I 14
r/o28, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

42) Mr Amol R Patil

r/oZC, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West40060 l, Maharashtra.

43) Mr Krishnakumar B Nair ,\i

r/o 2D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,-
Thane West-40060 1, Maharashtra.

@
M)Mr Charanjeet Si"gh Katorode
rlo 3A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge Manpada
Thane West40060 1, Maharashtra.

45) Mr Narendra M Pawar

rlo 4A, Angelica Garden CHS Lt4 Cosmos Loungg Manpad4
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

46) Mr Ashish Salvi

rlo 48, Angelica Garden CHS Lt4 Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
L
Thane West40060 l, Matrarashtra

)
47)Mr Deva
r/o 4C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Thane West40060 l, Maharashtra.

48) Mr VR Gopakumar

Page 7 of3E of CC No.3505 of 2017

r:
(,
T

I
 I 15
r/o 4D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lotrnge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

49) Mr Pramod Dahat

r/o 5A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-40060 1, Maharashtra.

50) Ms Pranali Amare

:'
rlo 58, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lotrnge, Manpada,-'
Thane West-40060 I, Maharashtra.

@
5I ) Mr Vinayak M Khandeparkar
r/o 5D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-400601, Maharashtra.

52) hdr Shild Kumr

rlo 6A, Angclica fuen CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lormge, ltaryaAa,
Thane West-40060'1, Maharashfra.

53) Mr Brijlh Singh

rlo 6B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lomge, Manpad4

Thane West400601, Maharashtra

54) Mr Krishna Shastri

rlo 6C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 1, Maharashtra.

55) Mr Rajesh Deshmukh

ptrtes it$i;r:i f,..|
'r)\-!' -:

C €:!

I
Page E of3E ofCC No.3505 of2017
t)

iiJ !-1 .,,i i.l ii t,ili

 9.
.t

I 16
rlo 8A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

56) Mr Parag S Naik

r/o 9A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West40060 1, Maharashtra.

57)Mr Sameer P Satere

:
rlo9B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada;"
Thane West40060 l, Maharashtra.

e 58)MrTLXavier
rlo 9C, Angelica Garden CHS Lt4 Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

59) Mr Kamaljit Singh

r/o l0B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

60) Ms Latika H. Blranushali

( r/o l0C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Thare West-40060 1, Maharashtra
( I
)

6l) IvIr Nallapati Ranga Rao

r/o'10D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

62)Mr Vilas Shinde 1

Uir;Pilte:: li
t;rtiii .i fi
--.ii'..-.t .
+i r :f .r'
(i, ft
t:.
^-
t-.G;,:-ji
:' Page 9 of38 ofCC No.35O5 of2017
-) ,1,i, t:,..

i_----

* l
i{ .:,.,. r-1ir l5l
 a
17
r/o lla, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

63) Mr Mahendra Devji Khona

r/o I lB, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

64) Mr V,jay Shastri i

r/o 1lA, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane Wesr40060 l, Maharashtra.

@
65) Mr Dheeraj Goyal
r/o I lD, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos l.otmge, Manpada"
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra

66) Mr Sardesh Nalawade

rlo l2A" Angelica Gardsn CHS Lt{ Cosmos Lurngg Manpada
Thane West-40060 1 . Maharahtra-

6?)Ivk Nitin Singh

( rlo l2C, Angelica Garden CHS Lt{ Cosmos Lotmgg Manpada
Thane West-40060 1, Maharashtra
,,

68) Kiran Shet

r/o 13,A., Angelica Garden CHS Ltq Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 1, Maharashtra.

69) Mr Ashish Naik

r/o l3C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

t, +,f i Page l0 of3E of CC No.35O5 oI 2017

.,;s:..)i.:.
,\{iI': g
l"i; r'-

;.
il,;t't i)lril,:
 18
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

70) Mr Anilkumar Yadav

r/o l4B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West-40060 1, Maharashtra.

7l) Mr Biju Cherian

r/o llA,Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosnros Loungc, Marr@
Thane West40060 l, Maharashtra.

72)Mr Prasanna Rajaram Aher

e r/o l58, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Marpada,
Thane West40060 l, Maharashtra.

73) Ms Medha R Chaubal

r/o lSC, Angelica Garden CHS Lt4 Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West40060 1, Maharashtra.

74)Mr Vrjay D Meshram

rlo l7A,$ngelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, M3npuau,

Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

75) Ms Shraddha G Tulsankar

rlo lTB, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lor.rnge, Manpad4

Thaine Wost40060 l, Maharashtra.

76) Ms Maneesha M Oke

r/o l7C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West tra.
t
r_i{

. :r'-'
11'1,:'-' Lr Page I I of 38 of CC No.3505 of 2017
t::
'1',.
j.
'/v' r
)i,: ..., -': r
".-,
 19

77)Mr Ashish Kane

r/o l8A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

78) Mr Kishor Wathe

r/o l8C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West-40060 1, Maharashtra.

79) Mr Shekhar Jain

r/o 19A.'Angelica Garden CHS I-t4 Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
@
Thane West40060 l, Maharashtra.

80) Mr Sanjay J. Sineh

r/o l9B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 l, Mahar&a-

8l ) Mr Kutubuddin M Sheikh
r/o 79D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West-40060 l, Matrarashtra

(_ .t
82) Mr Satyen Dahriwal
r/o 2AC, Angelica Gardert CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West-40060 1, Maharashtra.

83) Mr Mayank Sharma

r/o 20D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West-40060 1, Maharashtra.
..-{t--- ltr,iir.i
sis

!
I
i Page 12 of 3E of CC No.3505 of 2017
It.l,
-tt
i.
r
l;itu,i
 I

20
84) Ms Dipali Sarolkar
r/o 7A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West40060 1, Maharashtra.

85) Mr Hemant Somaiya

r/o 3D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Thane West-40060 l, Maharashtra.

86) Mr Sanjay B. Shinde

r/o lA Hollyhock CHS LtA Cosmos Lotmgg Marpada
Thane West- 400601, Maharashm.
@

87) Mr Mahesh G Kendhe

r/o lB Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada
Thsre West- 400501, Maharashtra.

88) Mr Hitesh Bawa

rlo2A Hollyhock CHS Lt4 Cosmos Lourngg Manpda
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

(
89) Mr Ninad Chikhalikar
rio3B HoHyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos [,ounge, Maneada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra. ',

90) Mr Yogeesh R Shetry

r/o3C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

91) Mrs Vrjay & Ravi fl.anganath an

out? s i'd..$
i$\:
;,1j':'1t,';11,'::'
't Page 13 of38 of CC No.3505 of 2017
,'1
4
. 1.

li.' * :i',,
 21
r/o 4B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
'fhane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

92)Mr Sandeep Shashikant Dani

Mrs Deepa S Dani

r/o 4C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

93) Mr Ratrul Karanjawala

Mrs Apeksha Karanjawala
r/o 4D Hollyhock CHS Lt4 Cosmos [,ounge, Manpa&4
@
Thane West- 4fr)60l, Matrarashtra.

94) Mr Manoj Nalliattr

Mrs Sunanda Manoj
r/o 5A Hollyeock CIIS LtA Cmmos Lormge, Manpd4
Thane West- 4(Xl6Ol, Mahamashtra.

95) Mr Govind B Savant

rio,58 Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos [.ounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 4006101, Maharashtra.
(

96) Mr Souvik Bhattacharya \

rlo 5C Hollyhock CHS LtdCosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Thane West- 40060I, Maharashtra.

97) Mr Ameya A Bhandekar

rlo 5D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Page 14 of38 ofCC No.3505 of2Ol7

*l
 a 22
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

98) Mr Sandip V. Londhe Mr Abhijit V. Londhe

rlo 6A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

99) Mr Anand RRajput

Mrs Vishali A Rajput
rio l6D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West- 400601, Matrarashtra.

@ 100) Mr Selvin J. Manjaly

Mrs Nimmy S. Manjaly
r/o 7A Hollyhock CHS Lt4 Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Thane West- 400601, Matrarashtra

i 0l ) IvIr Prakash D. Chipande

Mrs Snehal P. Chipande
rio 8A Hollyhock CHS Lt{ Cosmos Lotrnge, Manpada"
-thane
West- 400601, Maharashtra,

LI 102) Mr Saqiay K- Khare

Mrs Monica Khare

rlo 9A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

103) Mr Suresh S. Malapurath

r/o 98 Hollyhock CHS Lt{ Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

iii:; pr t.t t t: s ri' r..rt

l
.'...-". ,..,.": l*.; "
..: I,i

, "., 'a')
Pagc l5 of 38 of CC No.3505 ol 2Ol7

j,.' -,k
j!c\.r i.jui:ii
 23
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

104) MrAnuj K. Bhatt

Mr Kumal A. Bhatt
Mr Ajit P. Bhatt
r/o 9C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra

105) tvlr Sukhendu M Patnaik

Mrs Subela Patnaik

e r/o l0B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lormge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Matrarashtra

106) Mr Pravin M. Sonavane

r/o lOC Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosnros Loungc, Ivlaryd4
Thile Wcst- 400601, Matrarashtra

107) MrCrovardran C. Sharkhane

Mrs. Anjana Sharkhane

r/o lOD Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lotmge, Marpd4
C
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

\108) Mr Bhagesh C. Sharma )

r/o l lC Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,

Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

109) Mr Prasad Madhukar Jadiye

Mrs Shubhada P. Jadiye

rlo l2B Hollyhock s Lounge, Manpada,

.iir' :.
G -,t. . .

''. i': I '

Page l6 of3t ofCC No.3505 oI2Ol7
;:f.j\.'
i,]*,
",,t'', t
+F

24
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

I l0) Mrs Malabika Mitra

Mr Ashim Dutta
r/o lZC Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpad4
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

I I I ) Mrs Manisha S. Sonawane

:
Mr Sandip K. Sonanane
r/o l3A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
G Thane West- 40060I, Maharashtra.

I t2) Mr Chirag Panchal

Mrs Preet Panchal
r/o l3C Hollyhock CHS Lt4 Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Matrarashtra.

I 13) Mrs K. Jaya Rambabu

r/o l4C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosrnos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Matrarashtra.
(

I l4) Mr Par4g Mahajan Mn Kbushbu Mahqian

r/o l5A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos f.ounge,'Maryada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

I l5) Mr Girish V. Pawar

Mrs Sonali G. Pawar
r/o 158 Hollyhock CHS LtdCosmos l.ounge, Manpada,

;11' i;'r.1.,
11if'P:ttoi: iil:: 1

, ',.-l i: .

Page 17 of38 ofCC No.3505 of2Ol7

 I
25
Thane West- 40060 I Maharashtra.

116) Mr Suhas J Jadhav Mrs. Shubhangi J Jadhav

rio l5C Hollyhock CHS Lt4 Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

1 17) Mr Sanjay R. Mohite

Mrs Sushma S Mohite

:

r/o l5D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Loungg Manpad4

Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.
@

I 18) I\4r Anand V. Khanvilkr

Mrs Trupti AKhanvilkar
r/o 16A Hollyhock CHS Ltd Cosmos Lonrnge, Manpada
Thane West- 400601, Mahmashtra

I 19) Mrs Sheeta RModi

rlo l6C Hollyhock CHS Ltd Cosrnos Lormge, Mrrpada

Thanq West- 400601, Matrarashtra.

(.,
120) Mr Amarendra P Singhdeo

Mrs Monalisa SingMeo

\ r/o 16D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lourlge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

12l) Mr Manoj J Bhandary

Mrs Ituithika Bhandary
rlo 17A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada
Thane West-
gr:'

.r g,;.,
Page lt of3E ofCC No.3505 of2017
\tl
f,i
.ij.
 26

122) Mr Rakesh R. Modi

rlo l7C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada
Thane West- 400601. Maharashtra.
,
123) Mr Parag Desai
r/o l8A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra. ,r.

124) Mr Sundip R Pal

@
Mrs. Sancheta S Pal'
rlo lgAHollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, lvlarpda,
Thane West- 400601. Maharashtra.

125) Mr Bipin Panchal

Mrs Geetha B. Panchal
rlo l9C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601 Maharashtra.

(.
Mrs Baisali Datta
rlo 19D Ilottyhock CHS Ltd Cosmos Lotruge, Manpada
\ Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra. ',

127)Mr Jaideep Singh Gadri

r/o20A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lo.unge, Manpad4
Thane West- 400601. Maharashtra.

128) Mr Nirbhay D. Deshmukh

;isPlti;:;s
gr i; ili
Page 19 of lE of CC No.3505 of 2017
'I

t'-l
..-,l.^
i:l B

-i:
li $,,'l ,
. -. . .,1: I
 I
27
Mrs Rekha N Deshmukh
r/o 208 Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

129) Mr Sumit Banerjee

Ms Vishaly Rajput
rlo20D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosrnos Lounge, Manpada
Thane West- 400601, Maharashtra.

o Versus
l) M/s Cdsmos Constnrction
Through its Director,
Mr Manish Mehta
Office at Cosrnos House" b€hind TMC office,
Sant Dnyaneshwar Road, P.anc*rpakhadi, Thane [V]

2)Ws tlahyabhai & Co. Pt/t- Ltd

Through AR
l2l, iudifial Towers, C-Wing

c l2th Floor, Nariman Point

Mumbai ...Opposite Parties

BEFORE:
(
l

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAM sUnar RAM (MAURYA),

PRESIDING MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. BINOY KT'MAR, MEMBER
For the Complainants : Ms.Pranali Sawant, Advocate

For the Opposite Parties : Mr.Sukumar Pattjoshi, Sr. Advocate

Ms.Swati Sinha, Advocate
p\slrttt.-"s i,'r,;, Mr.Ram Krishna Rao, Advocate
,.. r'l i '
L;

Page20 of38 ofCC No.3505 of2017

|,,.,'
-' t,'
 28
ORDER
Binoy Kumar, Member
I. The present Consumer Complaint has been filed by Mrs.
Aparna Deepak Pande & Ors (hereinafter referred to as the
Complainants) under Section 21 read with Section 12(1)(c) of
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") against 1.
Mis Cosmos Construction, 2. Mis Dahyabhai & Co. Pvt Ltd.
[hereinafter referred to as "the Opposite Party No. I (Developer)
and Opposite Party No.2 (landowner) respectively] alleging
deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties with the
· main prayer to direct them to obtain the· Occupation Certificate,
execute Conveyance and certain other reliefs.
2. The brief facts as per the Complaint are that the
Complainants have filed the Complaint in representative capacity
against the Opposite Parties for rendering deficient service and
adopting unfair trade practice. The Complainants are residents of
Cosmos Lounge, a project of the Opposite Parties situated at
Opposite Neelkanth Greens, Chitalsar, Manpada, Thane (West) -
400610. The Opposite Parties have entered into an Agreement
, fQr . Sale (hereinafter . re(erred to as the Agreement) with the
Purchasers ranging from 2009 to 2015. The Opposite Party No. I
constructed four buildings/ towers forming part of the Cosmos
LoW1ge Project.
3. The Complainants stated that after taking possession of the
flats in the year 2010, they realized that the quality of the
construction was not as assured by the Opposite Parties. The
Opposite Parties have not provided all the amenities and services
depicted in advertisement/ brochures issued by them and agreed
upon as per r�s in Agreement to Sale. They have
..,·· -is•· u,s,,,,J\- ,._,,, � i
/��:;�:�'. '.:�- ;,�-::�·;. ,: : ·;.��'�'.:>, ',,'\ '

\�:�:_.
{ �: f

....
:- ·

:Y
·,.\ \

-
Page 21 of38 of CC No.3505 of 20 I 7

��--,,..2�:: JC� i_�, '.",:

.-·
,./
 29
approached the Opposite Parties and different Government/ local
bodies to get their grievances redressed. However, none of their
efforts yielded any result. The Complainants therefore
approached this Commission.
4. Some of the main original grievances raised by the
Complainants are as under: '
a) Occupation Certificate (OC for short):
The Complainants submitted that inspite occupying their
respective flats since 20 l 0, the Opposite Parties have not
been able to procure the Occupation Certificate for the
three Buildings 2, 3 and 4 (at the time of filing of the
Complaint).
b) Conveyance Deed:
The Complainants have formed Hollyhock Society on
14.052013, Winter Garden Society on 26.06.2014 and
Angelica Society on 23.062013. Howcwr� inspite of Jcgal
mandate of Section 11 of Maharashtra Ownership Flat
Act,1963 (for short 'MOFA'), the Opposite Parties failed
to execute conveyance in the favour of the Society. The ·
Complainants stated that the Opposite Parties want to avail
the Floor Space Index (FSI) that could be available at
some time in future and hence delaying the execution of
conveyance.
_c) Amenities promised but not provided:
Exquisite Club House, Squash Court, Pool Tables,
Amphitheatre.
d) Entrance Gate:
The entire complex has 2 points for entry/exit. Of these
only one point h_as security $nclosure and iron gates while

Page 22 of38 of CC No.3505 of2017

 I 30
the entrylexit point which is directly connected to public
road is open and not provided with any secured
entrance/exit facility. The Developer has not provided the
pennanent cabin for security guard and compound wall.
e) Amenities provided with Sub-Standard Quality:
The Opposite Parties constructed a Swimming Pool
consisting of temporary infrastructure. The internal roads
are of substandard quality. There are serious lapses on the
part of the Opposite Parties in respect of underground
water tank. The Electricity Power Substation is open
@
instead of a closed'one which is dangerous for the lives of
the residsnts.

5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid acts on the part of the Opposite

Parties, the Complainants prayed before this Commission to:
a) The Oppnenb be directed to furnkh occupanqt
certifrcae and execute convElance- The Opponan8
be direded to pcy conpensdion @ of Rs.500/- per dry
to eoch llet purchoscr from the dou of fornution of
seciay dll exccd*n of convqnnce as per fie lbtfiled
at Ert nC".
'b) The Opponena be dircged to constuct club house
equipped with ldest gnn cquipments, squash court,
C. pool taile'and tdblc tennb.
c) The Opponenb be dircc'ted to properly construci the
s*imming pal along witli all tlie necessary sel up as
. dacribed in paragraph ao. (V) (1) (4 of cantploint (
opplicatiott )
d) The Opponena be directed to py an interest @ IE%
on Rs.20,0M/- lo each fiat purchoser from the date of
payrnent till construction of club house.
e) The Opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs.2
lacs along with interest @ I8% as narrated in
paragraph no. A @ 6) of complaint.
fl The Opponents be directed to provide Amphitheatre as
mcntioned in Annexnre N of agreement to sale.
Q::;1,.
0 \5pttt€S

Page 23 ofJE ofCC No.J505 of2017

' r" rlii.;\irl:-'-l

 31
g) The Opponenb be directed to construct permanent
gate, security cabin and fence at the entrance as
prayed in paragraph no. (V) (4) (C).
h) The Opponents be directed to ,nake necessary
provkion ensuring that the water tanks meant for
hollyhock socielt and winler garden sociegt ore Jilled
simultaneously by tke overtlowfromfae water tank
, The Opponents be direcled to complete the internal
repairc and plastering of domatic watcr tanles with
duefinbhing as per standard practice. The opponents
be also directed to clean remove the debris lyins in the
water tank and ensure thqt are clgan and free of
debtris andforeign bodics. ii
j) The opponents fu direcied a enclose'the power
substotion as prtyed in paregraph ao- (Y) (1) (E).
€l k) The Opponent be direcled to p1t aa onount of
Rs.S0ffi/- per fld purchoser by.way of coagensaion
for the ntntot and pkysbal horraorrlralt arccd to
hirn
l)
The Opponent fu dbdcd to py Rs.I,A,W- by *cy
of Cost of Litigdba-
m) That aay other relief to rrh&:h the oqbin@rt b
entitled in low and equity aoy *indly be get*d to the
cutplainant

6. Thc Opposite Party No. I raisd folbwiag objetiurs in its

writcn v€f,sion:
a. The Project Cosmos Lounge comprises of four
buildings namely l.ffiii{ 2. Angelic4 3.
(- Hollyhock and 4.. Winter Crtrd€n. The Thane
Municipal Corporation (TMC for. short) granted
Occupation, Certificate for Building No. I i.e,

Orchid on 04.08.2010.
b. The Opposite Party No. I gave application dated
20.04.2010 to the TMC for issuance of Occupation
Certificate of Building No. 2 and Plinth Certificate
of Club House followed by several reminders and
Ietter dated 09.09.2011 for Occupation Certificate
{
for Building No. 3 . In order to avoid delay and
, of 2017
Page 24 of 38 of CC No.3505

*--..-:-' ,.
, ,1. ',_ li'1
 32
inconvenience possession of the flats of all four
buildings were given to the flat purchasers from
2010 onwards. Possession for Building No.2 was
to be given by May, 2010, Building No.3 by May,
201I and Building No.4 by 2012.
c. The TMC vide leter dated 23.07.2012 rejected the
applications for Occupation Certificate for Building
No. 2 and 3 and Plinth Certificate for Club House
for want of No Objection Certificate (NOC) from
Urban l,and Ceiling (UI,C) authority. The
@
Opposite Parties replied that NOC from the ULC
authorities is not related to issue of grant of
Occupation Cqtificate. However, TMC replied
vide letter dated 27.08.2012 to Opposite Party No.
I denranding NOC ftom ULC Deparffient" The
Opposite Party No. ! gave application datod
29.01.2013 to TMC for Occupation Certificate for
Building No.4.
d. The Opposjte Party No.l filed Writ Petition No. 178

t'
of 2013 against State of Matrarashtra through Urban
Development Department, Mumbai, ffrAC and
other seeking quashing of letter dated 23.07.2012,
27.A8.2O12, ffid dsclaration of deerned Occtpation I

Cbrtificate and seeking provisional Occrrpation

Certificate for Building Nos.2 and 3. (However,
this is still at pre-admission status as seen from the
High Court site).
e. The Opposite Parry No.l sent a letter dated

TMC seeking approval for amended

1t iir

a,
z)
\)
Page 25 of 3t of CC No.3505 of 2Ol1

_"ir
ilgir; [ir iitl
 33
plans for development of the balance plot i.e. GUT
No.59Al 2/G /2 / 2, 591/ 2H. 59N 1682-11 2, 59/
Al 3B,/ I by amalgamating the balance plot with the
land comprising V.P. No. 160/2005 and by loading
the FSI of the balance Plot in V.P. No. 160/2005.
J
The TMC rejected approval of the amended plan
and Occupation Certificate for Building Nos. 2,3
and 4 and Plinth Ceftificate'for.the'Club House for
want of Matrarashtra Housing and Area
Development Authority (for short 'MHADA')/
@
MHADA'S NOC vide'Ieuer dated 16.08.2014.
MHADA grantod NOC on24.O3.201,5.
f. The delay in obAining tlre Occupation Certificate
was due to technica! hrcaucratic, administrative
issues in the nmcmtng of the government
authorities.

7. lVe have heard thc lcrnod Cormscl for both the prties ard
perused the material available.on record.

8. The leamed Counsel for the Cornplainants argued that the

U Complaint is filed under Sectibn 12 (f ) (c) of the Act for
Building Nos. 2, 3 and 4. The possessions of the flats were to be
given from the yeqr 2010, which was done and flats occupied. (

But there has been abnormal delay in getting the Occupation

Certificate. The Occupation Certificate for Building Nos. 2 and
3 rvas granted only in the year 2023 after a long unreasonable
delay. The Occupation Certificate for Building No.l was
available in the year 2010 and therefore it is not an issue of
dispute. The TMC vide letter dated 22.09.2015 informed the
ion Certificate for Building Nos.2,
-'-'.,-
Page 26 of JE of CC No.3505 of 2Ol7
ls.l
.lti l.v
''. **qt''
'jir:-1
.F,
tl:
rtr, et,'
't
i
',1{:
 34
3, 4 would be issued subject to payment of charges/penalty but
the Opposite Parties did not pay the penalty. She argued that
prayer for construction of Compound wall be allowed.
9. The learned Senior Counsel of the Opposite Parties argued
that the Complaint is devoid of merit. He argued at length how
the Opposite Parties were subjected to a lot of difficulties by
different agencies of the Government and had to take legal
recourse, time and again. Therc wef,E agencies like ULC
Department, MHADA, TMC, Urban Darelqpment Department,
Forest Department involved and there were a number of
€)
formalities like obtaining' NOC, clearances, .directions and
payment of penalty for no fault of ftc qpposite Prties. There
was a valid sanction plan for the four Buitdings. Building work
corrmenced accordingly and completed as p€r Agreernent. The
Occupation Certificate for Building No.l was obtained in the
year 2010. With best efforts, Occrpation Certificate for Building
No. 2 & 3 was obtained in the year 2023. No Occupation
Certificate has been obtained for Building No. 4. He argued that
the Opposite Party No. I obtaind consent lettcrV ldemnity Bond
from the flat-purghasers in respect of ongoing development and
{;
constnrction activity in the Projd and were also made aware
that possession was given only to minimize dre diffrculties being
faccd by them. , The main r€ason for delay in getting the
Occupation Certificate is on account of the flat allottees not
signing the NOC giving their consent for amalgamating the plots
and for obtaining the requisite FSI, which would have enabled
the grant of the Occupation Certificate. It is the fault of the
allottees which has resulted in the delay. The Opposite Parties
made diligent ing Oc0upation Certificate but it
rlii 'i

Page27 of3Eof CC No.J505 of 2Afi

 35
got delayed due to technical, bureaucratic, adminiskative issues
in the functioning of the government authorities and not on
account of deficiency of serwice of the Opposite Parties.
10. Both the learned Counsel made elaborate arguments and
filed many docume"t i" support of their contentions. It is
in question had a long history, which
admitted that the land
involved intsfl/ention of Government Departments/
Administration and Judiciary at various levelS. The land of the
Project fo.rms part of a larger chunk of t'an4 which curme under
the Urban Ceiling Law and accordingly only a portion of it was
@
allowed to be retained by the land owner.' Even in the land which
came under posscssion of the land ownrr, there was an issue of
to be sorted ottr- Futkr, there was
tenancy, whicfi rcedod
complication of MIHDA res€n ing ccrtain arica asi House Site
(A) as per Thm DevclopM Ptan. While the land owner rnay
harrc gure tho%h thc rrairxs timc consming fumslitics, fu
fact reirrains ftd fu hd ou'ner and tlre Dweloper p,rrrymcd tlrc
Project in a land wh€rc ffr€rc were a nrmrber of conryliccions.
Such a huge Project should not have been announced whsn the

L clarity on issue likq LJLC, i"n*.y, Reservation by MHADA

House Site (A) and various clearances, if any, were not obtained
beforehard. Furthcr, it is seen that as ccrtain cl€araec€o w€f,e

obtained, the Developer kept making changes in the plan, whicll

resulted in delays and avoidable diffrculties to the allottees of
flats constructed as per the original plan.
ll. The Developer obtained sanction for building a Project
comprising four apartment buildings and a club house in an area
of 26,080 sq. mt. at various stages from 07.11.2007 to
04.08 buildings were constructed as per the

-..,':,' ,

i.:i .}
)i ;t)
Page2t of3E ofCC No.3505 oI2017
ifir', ,1i

'{,}*.
. i, - !rl' . Hr_
-,(i' :

r( i':;i
i:
 36
sanctioned plan granted by the Planning Division of TMC. The
buildings were completed more or less as per tirneline given in
the respective Agreements and the Developer was able to obtain
the Occupation Certificate for Building No.l in the year 2010
itself. In the meantime, on completion of the four buildings, the
Developer handed ovh possession of the flats to the respective
allottees.
12. While the OC for Building No.I was obtained by the
Developer in 2010, it applied to TMC for OC of Building No.2 in

@
2010, OC for Building Nos.2 and 3 €ain n 2}ll and OC for
Building No.4 in 2013.
13. One of the oomplications that aosc in the meantime was
on account of ttre Dweloper $bmitting a revised plan for
sanction by TMC on account of adjusUnent of land holding in
which it also stipulated congtruction of two additional buildings
in order to utilize csrtain additional Floor Space Index (for short
FSI) that was supposedly m& available. If the Developer
would have restricted its proposal to &c four buildings and thc
club.house, it had the necessary FSI and the sanction and there

t would have been ng gbjectiolr

Occupation Certificate. The addition
ol the part of TMC to grant
of two buildings and
the

seeking sanction of composite phr crzted problern for obtaining

the OC for eten the originally sanctid buildings. :
14. It is also seen that TMC in its letter dated 22.A9.2015 had

clearly informed the Devel operlArchitect of the Developer that

the Corporation had sanctioned the Occupation Certificate for
Building Nos.2, 3 and 4 subject to payment of certain charges,
which included penalty for an amount of Rs.4,25.98,450/-. This
rvas reiterated in the letter of TMC dated 28.03.2018, which
iyi:11. ti .iis ,.} ,
,' .]
.t Page 29 of J8 of CC No.3505 of 2017
'..i,t:.. .. r,
::,
i,,'r'_,'
,

:):
 37
stated that the Occupation Certificate for Building Nos.2, 3 and 4
"will be sanclioned keeping aside the sanction of amended plan,
which included the addition of two more buildings provided
payment as freshly calculated is made at the revised rate with
l2Yo rate of interest within 12 months by way of postdated
cheques to be deposited to TMC".

15. These two tetle.s of TMC clearly show that the grant of
Occupation Certificate for the three buildings and club house was
never an issue with TMC. The only issue was that the Developer
wanted the amended plan also to be sanctioned, which included
@
two additional buildings and also reduction of penalty as levied
by TMC. So the delay of OC beyond 2Al5 was solely on
account of the Dweloper.
f5. Let us see the chronolory of the Dweloper submitting
Plans ad seeking aprprovals for OCs. The Dweloper had b€en
submitting plans forryroval for TMC in phases. The first plan
was submittcd for Building No.l in tte yer 2006 and thereafter
for Building Nos.2 & 3 in the year 2W7 ard fm hritding Noa-I,

?,3 & 4 in the year 20A9. The sanction was obtained forthe total
area of the. Plog which was 26,080 sq. mL 6 per permissible FSI
C
at the time. There was a modified plam for the buildings
submitt€d in erc year 2010, which was approved by the TMC in
its sanctickr letter dated 04.08.2010 for the four building$ and

club house. However, in the year 2A13, the Developer submitted

another plan proposing three additional buildings namely
Building Nos.5, 6 & 7. This plan was for an area of 27,660 sq.
mt. In the year 2015, the Developer submitted another plan for
approval of Building Nos.l to 5 reducing the area of plot to
26,565 the year 2021, the Development once again
J:':
I t
.:- ,-i
r I
Page 30 ofJ8 ofCC No3505 oI2017
(: rrl
L'-
'!,$. (
.:,&* j

,l ii
'!t Jr
:.,..'it i,.:ittii
 38
submitted another plan with Building Nos.l to 6 for area of
26,565 sq. mt. There was another proposal for approval
submitted by the Developer in the year 2022 for Building Nos.l
to 6 for the same area. The plans submitted from the year 2013
onwards, as per the record available on file, have not been

approved by the TMC.

I
17. The basic problem, which we now find from the arguments
made as well as from record is that the Developer having
obtained a valid sanction for four buildings by the year 2010 utd
@ having made the allotrnents and entered into registered

Agreemerits for Sale and having obtained the Occupation

Certificate for Building No.l started making changes in the
layout plan from the year 2Ol3 onwards resulting in the
concerned Authorities not granting the Occupation Certificafe for

the other three buildings as originally plamred, sanctioned and

cxecuted.

18. We havc to also see whether Complainants of

Building Nos.2-4 uc at fault for having occupied the flats on
allotmen! from the year 2Ol0 onwards in spite of knowing tlrat

e the Occtpation Ce.rtificate ha noJ been obtained. On the face of

the mafier, allottees are not expected to occupy the flats for
which ttre Occ-trpaion Certiftcate has not been obtained. We are
relyingbn the Order ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court in in thc casc
af Deboshis Sinha & On. Ys. M/s,R..nf.fi. Enterprises & Ors.,
in CivilAppeal Nu3313 of 2024 decided on09.02.2023, held as

under:
"21. Since it is found that the appellants while praying
for monetary conqrensation of Rs.1,80,00,000.00 have failed
to give detatled particulars and/or provide the basb therefor,
and undoubtedly, they have also been on the wrong side of
law by {.r theii. respective Jlats without the
,:1,/

:1
Page 3l of 18 of CC No.3505 of 2017
i_,)

I
i9t.rrr'* r:'..
 39
s

completion certifrcate, whatever might be the compulsion, we

are not inclined to direct the NCDRC to decide on the
compensation componenl That chapter slands closed The
remand b directed only with a view to secure adherence to the
promises thst the respondenls had made in the brochure
and/or advertisement, as the case may be, and thereby cover
up deficicncy in service, rf any, as well as the mandatory
stulutory provisions.'

However, in )heof this case, when the

circumstances
Occupation Certificate for Building No.l was obtained in the
year 2010, there wasi no ostensible reason for allottees in the

$ other three buildings to refuse moving in in their respective flats,

when the same had already been constructed. After all this is
Mumbai and getting shelter is a diffictrft proposition. The
allottees are not expectcd to know the complications, which later
this project encountered. The Derveloper was changing plans and
adding buildings in ttle hcpe of utilizing or gefting additiorul
FSI- Defmitcty the Dcrrcloper bd fnult for not h*iog
vizualized the difficuttics in Id mdcrs hoping to sornetrov
extract marimum FSI wift various p€rmudion and conditions.
However, this cannot be done at the cost of tre existing flat
C .buyers and there is a liuqit to the gxtent oftirnc they can wait.
19. The learned Senior Counsel for tre Opposite Parties
in obtairimg the Occtrpation Certifrcafes
argued frrat the delay
was ! on account of the Complainants not signin! the No

Objection Certificate (NOC) for amalgamating adjoining plot,

constructing additional buildings, changes in the Plans, etc.
From the record, it is seen that this NOC format was
circulated among the allottees only in the year 2018 by the
Developer. [t was not a specific NOC but a general NOC. The
conclud e
as unter:-

ce rti i ta$ i
'] :;,' Page32 oflE ofCC No.3505 ot2017
.:: \
^'.r
,.-,I

t,;i,'t.ti.
t)
,'.q*ir.-! d
a n
fufl1'r Deltri
 -9
40
"9. ll/e further conJirm, agree and accept that the said
Developer is at liberty and entitle to submil this consent/ NOC
to any governmcnt or semi government authorilics, planning
outhorities to demonstrote that the said Developer hos
acquired requbite written consent of the Purchoser of Fla*/
ruembers of the Society/ ies for making amalgamation,
addtlions or alterations in the said amended plan and or for
carryhg out additions/ aherations in the present sanclbned
building/ s an!/ or for carryhg out construction of additional
building as k y be permitted under the D.C. Rulzs and
Regulation*"

The moot question is what happened dwing ihe

@ intervening time. Surely, the 61 7 years of delay cannot be a
ground on'this count. The Dweloper was trying to do'things
which were not supposed to be done, as any clrange in Plan
would require consent of original buyers. He was dwiating from
the original sanction and in the process putting the original
allottees in great difficulty. Any Developer should know the
Development Control Rules for Matrarashtra Govemment before
embarking on such alarge Project.
This is clear from the letter of the TMC dated 19.03.2021,
in which it. was informed th_at requiremsnts under Rule 2.2. of
L- U:rified. Devclopment Control .and Promotions Rules, (for short
UDCPR) are not being fulfilled since the subrniued proposal is
for revised permission in which as psr Rule 2.2.3, it is meirtioned
*ido (v) "in case of revised permissiorl wherevAr third party
interest is created by way of registered Agreement to sale or lease
etc. of the Apartment, consent of such interested par[y/ persons
as specified undsr RERA Act shall be submitted".

20. It was further mentioned in the same letter of TMC that an

amnesty charges was levied for an unauthonzed use of Building
Nos.2, 3 same chilrges are paid and the revised
flisi)ilit $ ,.1
l'.t,i
t t./
,,i
.- rt^
'.2
-.,j,.1]
\r of38 ofCC No.3505 of20fi
i
ii r -,, Page 33
ar, il r{,r; .

' X.rlyra-
,i
'\-::.--':,.'...-i'"'
 I

I
41
plans to the extent of Building Nos.2, 3 and 4 submitted the
Occupation Certificate would be given. It was further mentioned
in the letter that in order to obtain the Occupation Certificate for
these three buildings, it is first important to do the same first and
only thereafter revised plans should be submitted for further
action. This is a very significant letter and it clearly brings on
record the fact th* the Developer was mixing the sanction of
Occupation Certificate for Building Nos.2,. 3 a"a + with his
application for sanction of revised plans for Building Nos.5 and

@ 6. The flat Buyers were right in not slgning the vague NOC for
consen! as they had aot obtained thc OC despite a huge delay.
They wer€ also not prrvy to what was transpiring betrreen the
Dweloper and TMC and ufic$er thsy would be fut to firft€r
difficrtty- lVe re not convid with the argument of krncd
Senior Couns€l of the Oppcftc Paties that dre allottecs shrld
fr msd- He citcd the con&litn in &c
have signcd &c I.IOC
Indcmity Body ald fu Agr€crffirt. In the Indannity B@d
executed betwm tre Andec and Developer, Paragraph 6 r€ads
as under:-

C, 'ilhc Pur&ca ho also knowledge thd thc hanoter

will propox oeioaol building or shifting of recrfuonal
garden and othcrencnitia olsao

Clause iii reads as under:-

uI will not create any obstruction dr objec'tion for
utilizing additional FSI and or other beneJits in terms of FSI
and/ or TDR while d*ebping the sai"d property and/ or any
timc even afier completion of the present development schente
in respect of ke said proper$r.'

In the Agreement, Clause 4l read as under:

'41) The Promoters shall be entitled to amalgamde the said

property with the adjoining or neighbourhood properties and
{ bys all be entitled to make use of
t..
a

CQ rtifit $
Page 34 of 3E of CC No.3505 of 2Ol7
I
ta

*
11',

P,.:1i1 i,t? \'ti\

 42
I

additional FSI for constructing addilional tloors on the said

building and/ or any other structures/ buildings in the said
prqerty and/ or shall also be entitled to obtain and acquire
T.D.R. of any other properties for construction of additional
upper floors on the building to the constructed on the said
proryrty and for thot purpose, further shall be entitled to
make required amendmcnt and/ or modiJications in the said
appraved plans ond shall fur approval to such amendmenl/
modifrcaiofl revbion -from the said Corporation without
see*ing any separate approvaU consent/ permission from the
purchaser/s herein; and k fact, thb clause ifielf shall be as
s ac h permiss ion/ consenl "

Obviously this Clause runs counter to the Development

@ Control RuleV Regulation and even otherwise the Developer was
at liberty to gpproach the authority with this blanket permission
and there was no need for a s€parate NOC for consent.

21. Therefore, the delay of about a decade in getting the

Occupation Certificate for Building Nos.2 and 3 and the delay in
not obtaining the Occupation Certificate for Building No.4,
which is still awaite{ Iies squaely with the Developer. To this
extent, there is obvionsly a deficiency of service on the part of
the Developer and, therefore, the Complainants for Building
(
, Nos.2, 3 and 4 arejustified in getting due delay compensation.
However, a key question is, when will the Developer get the
Occupation Certificate for Building No.4, if he still persists with

) t*r sanction of revised building plur. In our cdrsidered view, ttre

issue of Occupation Certificate for Building No.4 and CIub

House should be segregated and disassociated from the sanction
of revised plan as perprocedure mandated under UDCPR. From
the evidence produced, TMC would have no objection in giving
the Occupation Certificate for Building No.4 and club house
I

its applications for sanction of

(; ., .- r; l.; .- ..

.-.ltta:-
.I !i,n'' :'
ttc';:> Page 35 of 3E of CC No.3505 ot 2017
ii,,.

t\:
\t6-\-
i'r a'i: il ::ll
 a
t,
43
t

the same in the first instance without linking it with sanction of

the bigger revised plan, which includes the two additional
buildings. The Complainants of the Building No.4 are entitled to
get their Occupation Certificate first, having waited for a decade.
22. It is also A"tlnut the Developer has paid amnesty charges/
penalty for having allowed possession without obtaining the
Occupation Certificate. We cannot burden the Developer beyond
a certain poinL as it has stated to have paid a h"fty penalty of
about Rs.6.7 crores. On the other hand, the Complainants have

G been staying in the apartments and therefore the delay

compeirsation in this paticular case has to be judicious in drc
interest ofjustice.

23. We consfuter it justified that the allottees of Building

Nos.2, 3 and 4 be paid delay compensatian @ Rs.1.5 lakh each.
The allctees of Building No.4 arc entitlod for the Occrryalon
d &c carliest wi'thin forn nronths almg with the delay
Ccrtificatc
co,rycnsdfun of Rs"I-50 lakhs. This d.lay ompensation is a
token amotmt based <xr approximatiur.
24. We will now deal with the other issues rqgarding amanities

$e Complaint. The most importamt of

raised in the prrayer of
amenities, which has not been provided is relating to the
constnrction of thc Club House for which tfre Opeosite Parties
had already taken Rs.20,000/- from each',flat purchaser at the
(
)

time of Agreement for Sale. No proper explanation has beert

given for the delay in construction of the Club House and,

thereforg this is a deficiency of service on the part of tlre

Opposite Parties. The second amenity mentioned in the prayer is
provision of amphitheater as given in Annexure-N of the
Agreement of Sale, the same has not been provided yet. There

i';i. iil,:.';ii S.:.ri

a(

i,,: ,;tiii,.,:,
Page 36 of 3E of CC No.3505 of 2017

-:
,.t .
. .t
.:
.
-
:('t .'
* I
i,l{H., i
-r\-!
lith.
:::r:i' .-
:$'l''r''
- i, ':t' .--.'

"'-.-.J', ir1,;: 1 1!.',1-l-

 44
a

are other issues mentioned like construction of permanent gate,

repairs of domestic water tanks, enclosure to Power Sub-Station
etc.

25. The Complaint has been filed under Section 12 (l) (c) of
the Act. This was allowed by the Order of this Commission
\
dated 05.12.2018.
26. ln view of the discussion above, the Consumer Complaint
is partly allowed with the following directio-ns to the Opposite
Parties to:-

@ (A) obtain the ftcupation Certificate for Building No.4

(WinterGarden) within four morr*rs of this Order by frting
application for its grant with concrrned atrthority
exclusively f.m Building No.4 and the club house;
(B) pay the ComplainantV allottees of Building Nos.2&3
(Angelica ard Hollyhock respectively) a delay
comp€nsation @ Rs-2.0 lakhs eactL wittrin a period of fotr
months, failing which an interest rate of 6Yo p.a. would be
levied on this amount from the date of this Order;
(C) pay a delpy compensation of Rs.2,0 lakhs to the

C' Co$ptainan6/ allouees of Building No.4 within four.

months of this Grder, failing which an interest rate of 6%o

per aurrm would be payable on this amount from fte date

of this Order; ',

(D) in case of delay of obtaining the Occupation Certificate for

Building No.4 (Winter Garden), beyond four months, the
Complainants/ allottees of this Buitding shall be paid
detay compensation @ 6oh per annum on their deposited
amount from respective dates of taking possession till the

grant of on Certificate. The amount of Rs.2.0

-n ,;
{"r Itcrti';s ii ',:

Page J7 offS ofCC No.3505 of2017

A ^ ..,4-.
l4*r^
.' -r^,

i i-
ij ii l.:i
 a
45
lakhs already paid as per Order above at (C) shall be
adjusted from this amount to be paid;
(E) complete the construction of the club house within six
months, failing which a delay compensation @ 60/o per
annum on the deposited amount for the club house by the
allottees, shall ba payable from the date of this Order;
I
(F) complete all the amenities as given in Agreernent for Sale

within six months

:.

t 27. On compliance of the Ordsr as contained in the preceding

@ paragraph 26 sub-paras A to E, the 9omplainants/ allottees.of the
four buildings shall give thcir cons€nt lefier (NOC) for further
construction by the Opposite Parties, widrin one rronth of such
request by the Opposite Parties, poviH srrc*r construrction
fulfills the condition of MOFA Building Regulations of Thane
Municipal Corporatioq Unifiod Dwelopment Cmtnol Rules and
thc permissible Floor Spacc hfu.
2E. Pending applicatiurs, ifany, stmd disposd of-

'
oo-''_'- "''i"'
(--/ t neu
1"rBAi Tjyly"-i;n;;;:
PRBslurf\rc praMgrn l'
;.
gisputes 4"
sdi.
C e i t il'i,;' \l
t:_';..
i.,.,;.:i,
( BINOY KLTMAR )
.
" a,:

MEMBIiR

;:r:: t, !-^rllt
t
Pankoj/Alc/B-5

Page 3E of 3t of CC No.3fl)5 ol 2017

 46

I .(
o
...q
N \

qo
{.
!
\J

n
CV
S
ry
(
N OET
\
t Ltozt90sgJ)
p
o)
o
tl :, a
--'-P
-= o Ei;
t- g.
b l! o
6e
+t
-cE
EEg
=.
4)!
a- --s
q)
a
\-\J
N ;\Ac

a) 3E o !t 6 g tsF U)
L SE
FS
;oH L(r I
U cr.9:
& e*<
tro
o ca
o o* ff$-fl"
3=a E(/) d-
,-i6E I pf
e=P :# E
$s1#
iil
i: oo-
iit
o
I l.\ =5i5
o
(o
1..
tt
Y,f ro s
iil lf)
(,
lil
iit
(D
t-
o
E
fff3s
.v
ETI t^'
iil
:
>
N^l =;g
8BE
.I
l! -r
XN
xo
r-B
!l
r'4 ,, ',
.z
t.:i
(:) ,"rl ,lLr!)
o';{
l^l
l>
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
47
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. _______ OF 2023

(APPEAL UNDER SECTION 23 OF THE CONSUMER

PROTECTION ACT, 1986)

(Arising out of the impugned final judgment and order dated 12.06.2023
passed by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
in CC No. 3505 of 2017.)

BETWEEN: - POSITION OF PARTIES

In the Ld. In this
NCDRC Hon’ble Court

1. M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS Respondent Appellant

Through its director No. 1
Mr. Manish Mehta
Office at: - Cosmos Construction,
Cosmos House, behind TMC office,
Sant Dnyaneshwar Road, Panchpakhadi,
Thane (w), Mumbai,
Maharashtra -
VERSUS

1. MRS. APARNA DEEPAK PANDE Complainant Contesting

Aged about 52 years, No. 1 Respondent
R/o, 17 B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No.1
Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West - 400610
Maharashtra

2. MR. YASHAWANT BALAKRISHNA SHINDE Complainant Contesting

Aged about 52 years No. 2 Respondent
R/o, 17 B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No.2
Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West,
Maharashtra – 400610

3. MR. KISHOR SHAMRAO KUMBHARE Complainant Contesting

Aged about 58 years No. 3 Respondent
R/o, Flat 19 A, Winter Warden CHS Ltd, No.3
Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West,
Maharashtra – 400610
4. MR. BALASAHEB ANANDRAO BABAR Complainant
48
Contesting
Aged about 54 years No. 4 Respondent
R/o, Flat 1 A, Winter Warden CHS Ltd, No. 4
Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West,
Maharashtra – 400610

5. MR. PRODIPTA BANERJEE Complainant Contesting

Aged about 52 years No. 5 Respondent
R/o, Flat 6 D, Angelica CHS Ltd, No. 5
Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West,
Maharashtra – 400610

6. MR. AMAR APPASAHEB CHAKOTE Complainant Contesting

Aged about 46 years No. 6 Respondent
R/o, Flat 18 B, Angelica CHS Ltd, No. 6
Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West – 400610
Maharashtra

7. MS. PRIYANKA SHRIVALKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 1-C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 7 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 7
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra

8. MR. BHISHAN RANE Complainant Contesting

R/o 2F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 8 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 8
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra

9. MR. SANTOSH PRABHAKAR ROUNDHAL Complainant Contesting

R/o 3A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 9 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 9
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
10. MRS. DEVYANI MORE Complainant
49
Contesting
R/o 3B, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 10 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 10
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

11. MR. SUDHIR KRISHN GHOSALKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 3C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 11 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 11
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

12. MR. ASHISH GADI Complainant Contesting

R/o 3E, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 12 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 12
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

.
13. MR. RAMAKANT GOVIND LOHAR Complainant Contesting
R/o 4A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 13 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 13
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

14. MS. ANURADHA A KACHARE Complainant Contesting

R/o 4C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 14 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 14
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

15. MR. RAHUL DATTATRAYA CHAOJI Complainant Contesting

R/o 5A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 15 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 15
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

16. MR. ANAND BUGDANE Complainant Contesting

R/o 5C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 16 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 16
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
17. MR. LAVLESH SINGH Complainant
50
Contesting
R/o 6A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 17 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 17
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

18. MR. BHASKAR KARBAHRI NALE Complainant Contesting

R/o 6B, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 18 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 18
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

19. MR. RAJENDRA SHETY Complainant Contesting

R/o 6F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 19 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 19
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

20. MR. SHARAD SAMBAJI NARVEKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 7C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 20 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 20
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

21. MR. AVINASH KAMALKAR KHARSHIKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 8A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 21 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 21
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

22. MR. MOHIT AGARWAL Complainant Contesting

R/o 8B, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 22 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 22
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

23. MS. MAYA RAVIKUMAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 9A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 23 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 23
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
24. MRS. VEENA KISHOR BANDAVALKAR Complainant
51
Contesting
R/o 9B, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 24 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 24
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

25. MR. RAHUL CHARNE Complainant Contesting

R/o 9C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 25 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 25
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

26. MR. SACHIN RAMESHRAO NANDESHWAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 9E, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 26 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 26
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

27. MR. NITIN G. BAWANKULE Complainant Contesting

R/o 12A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 27 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 27
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

28. MRS. MADHURA VISEN Complainant Contesting

R/o 12B, Angelica CHS Ltd, No. 28 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 28
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

29. MR. PRAVIN VILAS KHANDE Complainant Contesting

R/o 12C, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 29 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 29
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

30. MR. PANKAJ SUDHKAR PATIL Complainant Contesting

R/o 12E, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 30 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 30
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
31. MR. ABHAY CHALKE Complainant
52
Contesting
R/o 13A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 31 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 31
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

32. MR. VISHAL BATHIJA Complainant Contesting

R/o 14A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 32 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 32
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

33. MR. AMIT KUMAR SINGH Complainant Contesting

R/o 14D, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 33 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 33
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

34. MR. ANANT V WARDE Complainant Contesting

R/o 16F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 34 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 34
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

35. MR. SANDEEP NAKUL DAS Complainant Contesting

R/o 17A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 35 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 35
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

36. MR. RAMESHWAR LAL Complainant Contesting

R/o 19F, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 36 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 36
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

37. MR. SURESH PATHAK Complainant Contesting

R/o 20A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd, No. 37 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 37
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
38. MR. PREMKUMAR RATTA Complainant
53
Contesting
R/o 1B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 38 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 38
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

39. MRS. ANUPAMA RATTA Complainant Contesting

R/o 1C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 39 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 39
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

40. MR. NITIN BEOHAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 1D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 40 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 40
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

41. MR. SIDDHARTH PENDHARKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 2A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 41 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 41
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

42. MR. NIRMAL DEB Complainant Contesting

R/o 2B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 42 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 42
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

43. MR. AMOL R PATIL Complainant Contesting

R/o 2C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 43 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 43
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

44. MR. KRISHNAKUMAR B NAIR Complainant Contesting

R/o 2D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 44 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 44
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
45. MR. CHARANJEET SINGH KATORDE Complainant
54
Contesting
R/o 3A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 45 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 45
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

46. MR. NARENDRA PAWAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 4A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 46 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 46
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

47. MR. ASHISH SALVI Complainant Contesting

R/o 4B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 47 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 47
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

48. MR. DEVA Complainant Contesting

R/o 4C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 48 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 48
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

49. MR. VR GOPAKUMAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 4D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 49 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 49
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

50. MR. PRAMOD DAHAT Complainant Contesting

R/o 5A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 50 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 50
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

51. MRS. PARNALI AMARE Complainant Contesting

R/o 5B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 51 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 51
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
52. MR. VINAYAK M KHANDEPARKAR Complainant
55
Contesting
R/o 5D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 52 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 52
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

53. MR. SHARAD KUMAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 6A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 53 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 53
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

54. MR. BRIJESH SINGH Complainant Contesting

R/o 6B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 54 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 54
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

55. MR. KRISHNA SHASTRI Complainant Contesting

R/o 6C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 55 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 55
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

56. MRS. APURVA DILIP SAROLKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 7A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 56 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 56
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

57. MR. RAJESH DESHMUKH Complainant Contesting

R/o 8A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 57 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 57
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

58. MR. PARAG S NAIK Complainant Contesting

R/o 9A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 58 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 58
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
59. MR. SAMEER P SATERE Complainant
56
Contesting
R/o 9B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 59 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 59
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

60. MR. T L XAVIER Complainant Contesting

R/o 9C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 60 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 60
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

61. MR. SIDDHARTH NIMKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 9D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 61 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 61
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

62. MRS. GAURI ARORA Complainant Contesting

R/o 10 A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 62 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 62
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

63. MR. KAMALJIT SINGH Complainant Contesting

R/o 10B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 63 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 63
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

64. MS. LATIKA H. BHANUSHALI Complainant Contesting

R/o 10C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 64 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 64
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

65. MR. NALLAPATI RANGA RAO Complainant Contesting

R/o 10D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 65 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 65
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
66. MR. VILAS SHINDE Complainant
57
Contesting
R/o 11A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 66 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 66
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

67. MR. MAHENDRA DEVJI KHONA Complainant Contesting

R/o 11B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 67 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 67
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

68. MR. VIJAY SHASTRI Complainant Contesting

R/o 11C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 68 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 68
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

69. MR. DHEERAJ GOYAL Complainant Contesting

R/o 11D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 69 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 69
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

70. MR. SANDESH NALAWADE Complainant Contesting

R/o 12A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 70 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 70
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

71. MR. NITIN SINGH Complainant Contesting

R/o 12C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 71 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 71
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

72. MR. KIRAN SHET Complainant Contesting

R/o 13A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 72 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 72
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
73. MR. ASHISH NAIK Complainant
58
Contesting
R/o 13 C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 73 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 73
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

74. MR. ANILKUMAR YADAV Complainant Contesting

R/o 14B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 74 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 74
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

75. MR. BIJU B CHERIAN & MRS. RAMMOL Complainant Contesting

JACOB No. 75 Respondent
R/o 15A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 75
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

76. MR. PRASANNA RAJARAM AHER Complainant Contesting

R/o 15B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 76 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 76
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

77. MS. MEDHA R CHAUBAL Complainant Contesting

R/o 15C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 77 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 77
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

78. MR. VIJAY D MESHRAM Complainant Contesting

R/o 17A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 78 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 78
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

79. MS. SHRADDHA G TULSANKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 17B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 79 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 79
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
80. MRS. MANEESHA M. OAK Complainant
59
Contesting
R/o 17C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 80 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 80
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

81. MR. ASHIHS KANE Complainant Contesting

R/o 18A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 81 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 81
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

82. MR. SWAPNA WATHE Complainant Contesting

R/o 18B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 82 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 82
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

83. MR. SHEKHAR JAIN Complainant Contesting

R/o 19A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 83 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 83
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

84. MR. SANJAY J. SINGH Complainant Contesting

R/o 19B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 84 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 84
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra

85. MR. KUTUBUDDIN M SHAIKH Complainant Contesting

R/o 19D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 85 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 85
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

86. MR. SATYEN DAHRIWAL Complainant Contesting

R/o 20C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 86 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 86
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
87. MR. MAYANK SHARMA Complainant
60
Contesting
R/o 20D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 87 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 87
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

88. MS. DIPALI SAROLKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 7A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 88 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 88
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

89. MR. HEMANT SOMAIYA Complainant Contesting

R/o 3D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 89 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 89
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

90. MR. SANJAY B. SHINDE Complainant Contesting

R/o 1A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 90 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 90
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

91. MR. MAHESH G KENDHE Complainant Contesting

R/o 1B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 91 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 91
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

92. MR. HITESH BAWA Complainant Contesting

R/o 2A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 92 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 92
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

93. MR NINAD CHIKHALIKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 3CB, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 93 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 93
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
94. MR. YOGEESH R SHETTY Complainant
61
Contesting
R/o 3C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 94 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 94
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

95. MRS. VIJAYALAKSHMI RAVI & RAVI Complainant Contesting

RANGANATHAN No. 95 Respondent
R/o 4B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 95
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

96. MR. SANDEEP SHASHIKANT DANI Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Deepa S Dani No. 96 Respondent
R/o 4C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 96
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

97. MRS. APEKSHA KARANJAWALA Complainant Contesting

R/o 4D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 97 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 97
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

98. MR. MANOJ NALLIATH Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Sunanda Manoj No. 98 Respondent
R/o 5A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 98
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra

99. MR. GOVIND B SAVANT Complainant Contesting

R/o 5B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 99 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 99
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

100. MR. SOUVIK BHATTACHARYA Complainant Contesting

R/o 5C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 100 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 100
Thane West - 400601,
 Maharashtra.
62

101. MR. AMEYA A BHANDEKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 5D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 101 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 101
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

102. MR. SANDIP V. LONDHE MR. ABHIJIT V. Complainant Contesting

LONDHE No. 102 Respondent
R/o 6A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 102
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

103. MR. ANAND R RAJPUT Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Vishali A Rajput No. 103 Respondent
R/o 6D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 103
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

104. MRS. NIMMY S. MANJALY Complainant Contesting

R/o 7A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 104 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 104
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

105. MR. PRAKASH D. CHIPANDE Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Snehal P. Chipande No. 105 Respondent
R/o 8A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 105
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

106. MR. SANJAY K KHARE Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Monica Khare No. 106 Respondent
R/o 9A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 106
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
 63

107. MR. SURESH S. MALAPURATH Complainant Contesting

R/o 9B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 107 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 107
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

108. MR. KUNAL A. BHATT Complainant Contesting

R/o 9C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 108 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 108
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

109. MR. SUKHENDU M. PATNAIK Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Subela Patnaik No. 109 Respondent
R/o 10B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 109
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

110. MR. PRAVIN M. SONAVANE Complainant Contesting

R/o 10C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 110 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 110
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

111. MRS. ANJANA SHARKHANE Complainant Contesting

R/o 10 D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 111 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 111
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

112. MR. BHAGESH C. SHARMA Complainant Contesting

R/o 11C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 112 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 112
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
113. MR. PRASAD MADHUKAR JADIYE Complainant
64
Contesting
Mrs. Shubhada P. Jadiey No. 113 Respondent
R/o 12B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 113
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

114. MRS. MALABIKA MITRA Complainant Contesting

R/o 12C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 114 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 114
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

115. MRS. MANISHA S. SONAWANE Complainant Contesting

R/o 13A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 115 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 115
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

116. MRS. PREETI PANCHAL Complainant Contesting

R/o 13C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 116 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 116
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

117. MRS. K. JAYA RAMBABU Complainant Contesting

R/o 14C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 117 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 117
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

118. MRS. KHUSHBU MAHAJAN Complainant Contesting

R/o 15B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 118 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 118
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
119. MR. GIRISH V. PAWAR Complainant Contesting
R/o 15B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 119 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 119
Thane West – 400601,
Maharashtra.
120. MR. SUHAS J JADHAV Complainant
65
Contesting
Mrs. Shubhangi J. Jadhav No. 120 Respondent
R/o 15C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 120
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

121. MRS. SUSHMA S. MOHITE Complainant Contesting

R/o 15D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 121 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 121
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

122. MR. ANAND V. KHANVILKAR Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Trupti A Khanvilkar No. 122 Respondent
R/o 16A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 122
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

123. MRS. SHEETA R. MODI Complainant Contesting

R/o 16C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 123 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 123
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

124. MR. AMARENDRA P SINGHDEO Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Monalisa Singhdeo No. 124 Respondent
R/o 16D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 124
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

125. MR. MANOJ J. BHANDARY Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Krithika Bhandary No. 125 Respondent
R/o 17A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 125
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
126. MR. RAKESH R. MODI Complainant
66
Contesting
R/o 17C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 126 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 126
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

127. MR. PARAG DESAI Complainant Contesting

R/o 18A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 127 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 127
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

128. MR. GAURAV CHODANKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 18B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 128 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 128
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

129. MR. SUNDIP R PAL Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Sancheta S Pal No. 129 Respondent
R/o 19A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 129
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

130. MR. BIPIN PANCHAL Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Geetha B. Pancha; No. 130 Respondent
R/o 19C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 130
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

131. MR. ARINDRAJIT DATTA Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Baisali Datta No. 131 Respondent
R/o 19C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 131
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

132. MR. JAIDEEP SINGH GADRI Complainant Contesting

R/o 20A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 132 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 132
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
133. MR. NIRBHAY D. DESHMUKH Complainant
67
Contesting
Mrs. Rekha N Deshmukh No. 133 Respondent
R/o 20B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 133
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

134. MR. SUMIT BANERJEE Complainant Contesting

Ms. Vishaly Rajput No. 134 Respondent
R/o 20D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 134
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

135. MR. LOKESH SAH Complainant Contesting

R/o 10A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 135 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 135
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

136. MRS. DEEPTI MARU Complainant Contesting

R/o 11A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 136 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 136
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

137. MRS. VRUTANTI SHAH Complainant Contesting

Mr. Nikhil Shanbhag No. 137 Respondent
R/o 11B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 137
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

138. MRS. AMITA R. SHETTY Complainant Contesting

R/o 18C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 138 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 138
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

139. MR. ZUZER ABBAS PALANPURWALA Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Vaneeta Zuzer Palanpurwala No. 139 Respondent
R/o 2C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 139
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
140. MR. SANDEEP A. KENI Complainant
68
Contesting
R/o 3A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 140 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 140
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

141. MRS. SEEMA K. SALGAONKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 14B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 141 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 141
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

142. MR. ARUN A. PENDHARKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 13B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 142 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 142
Thane West – 400601,
Maharashtra.

143. MR. VIJAY M. AHALE Complainant Contesting

R/o 14A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 143 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 143
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

144. MRS. UMA P. CHOUDHURY Complainant Contesting

R/o 2D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 144 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 144
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

145. MRS. SEEMA V. MAYNIL Complainant Contesting

R/o 2B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 145 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 145
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

146. MR. YAJUR S. DHONGADE Complainant Contesting

Mrs. Ujwala Y. Dhongade No. 146 Respondent
R/o 11D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 146
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
147. MR. ABHAY JAIN Complainant
69
Contesting
R/o 1D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 147 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 147
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

148. MR. RAJESH CHANDRAKANT MIRLEKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 4A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 148 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 148
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

149. MRS. SONI A. PAWAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 8B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 149 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 149
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

150. MRS. JYOTI S. ROTEY Complainant Contesting

R/o 8C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 150 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 150
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

151. MR. RAMANAND S. MABLAN Complainant Contesting

R/o 9D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 151 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 151
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

152. MRS. DEVYANI J. PATKAR Complainant Contesting

R/o 17D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 152 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 152
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

153. MR. UDAY G. DHURI Complainant Contesting

R/o 6C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 153 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 153
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

154. MR. SHAJI MATHEW Complainant Contesting

R/o 19C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 154 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 154
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
155. MR. RAMDAS A. MANKAME Complainant
70
Contesting
R/o 20B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 155 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 155
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

156. MR. SANJEEV K. KOTHARI Complainant Contesting

R/o 3B, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 156 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 156
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

157. MR. SAURABH PAUL Complainant Contesting

R/o 7D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 157 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 157
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

158. MRS. MADHAVI MUKHARJI Complainant Contesting

R/o 12D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 158 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 158
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

159. MR. ASHOK CHANDA Complainant Contesting

R/o 20A, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 159 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 159
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

160. MR. CHANDRESH G. MANEK Complainant Contesting

R/o 7C, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 160 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 160
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

161. MRS. JYOTI SAINI Complainant Contesting

R/o 3D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 161 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 161
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.
162. MR. BIJOY STELLUS Complainant
71
Contesting
R/o 14D, Angelica Garden CHS Ltd, No. 162 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 162
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

163. MR. ARVIND B. CHANDE Complainant Contesting

R/o 6B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 163 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 163
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

164. MR. ABHISHEK BURMAN Complainant Contesting

R/o 12A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 164 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 164
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

165. MR. HARI MOHAN CHATURVEDI Complainant Contesting

R/o 7C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 165 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 165
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

166. MR. R M CHATURVEDI Complainant Contesting

R/o 7B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, No. 166 Respondent
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, No. 166
Thane West - 400601,
Maharashtra.

167. M/S. DAHYABHAI & CO. PVT. LTD. Respondent Proforma

Through its Authorized signatory No. 2 Respondent
121, Mittal Towers, C-Wing, No. 167
12th Floor, Nariman Point
Mumbai – 400 021

APPEAL UNDER SECTION 23 OF THE CONSUMER

PROTECTION ACT, 1986
TO
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND
72
HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE HON’BLE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.

THE HUMBLE APPEAL OF

THE APPELLANT ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. The Appellant has been constrained to invoke the Appellate Jurisdiction
of this Hon’ble Court under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act,
1986, (“the 1986 Act”) to challenge the final Judgment and Order dated
12.06.2023 passed by the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission, at New Delhi (“the Ld. NCDRC”) in Consumer Complaint
No. 3505 of 2017 whereby the Ld. NCDRC erroneously partly allowed
the Complaint filed by the Respondents Flat owners.

1A. That the Respondents had initially filed an I.A. No. 15474 of 2019 in CC
No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld. NCDRC seeking impleadment of 40
persons as parties to the proceedings which was allowed by Ld. NCDRC
vide order dated 13.01.2020. Thereafter, the Respondents also filed an I.A.
No. 1962 of 2021 in CC No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld. NCDRC seeking
impleadment of further parties, the same was inter alia allowed by the Ld.
NCDRC vide order dated 16.02.2022 passed in CC No. 3505 of 2017. The
final amended memo of parties is annexed at pg. nos. 202-216 but the same
could not be recorded in the impugned order due to some error.

2. BRIEF FACTS:

The facts of the case given below: -

A. That pursuant to the proceedings under the Urban Land Ceiling Act
(“ULC Act”) in the year 1989, 40% of a larger piece of land was allotted
to M/s. D. Dayabhai & Co./ Proforma Respondent No. 167 and the
balance land i.e., 60% was allotted to Maharashtra Housing and Area
Development Authority (“MHADA”). The Property that fell to the share
of D. Dayabhai & Co./ Proforma Respondent No. 167 was as follows: -

a) 12730.90 sq. mtrs. out of Gat No. 59/ 2 – Gat No. 59/2B/1A;
b) 20110 sq. mtrs. out of Gat No. 59/ 3; and
c) 2747.50 sq. mtrs. out of Gat No. 59/16 0 Gat No. 59/ 16B-1
B. That Pursuant to a Development Agreement on 20.05.2005, the Appellant
73
was assigned development rights w.r.t. the above-mentioned land ad-
measuring 35,588.40 sq. mtrs. by M/s. D. Dayabhai & Co./ Proforma
Respondent No. 167 (hereinafter referred to as “the said land”).

Note: The Appellant ‘M/s Cosmos Constructions’ is a Partnership Firm

and is engaged in the business of development, construction,
redevelopment of residential and commercial projects.

C. That since 2006 onwards, Appellant obtained Commencement

Certificates/ Building Permissions to build on the said Land.

D. That a dispute regarding tenancy on the said Land was taken up to the
Hon’ble High Court, the Writ Petition No. 5665 of 2009 filed by M/s. D.
Dayabhai & Co./ Proforma Respondent No. 167was disposed off vide
order dated 21.07.2009, inter alia, holding as under: -

“3. It is well settled that on acquisition the land which is to come to the
Government has to be free from all encumbrances. Therefore, the 60%
of land which is to come to the Government has to be free from all
encumbrances and therefore the encumbrances of tenant cannot be
foisted upon the land which has come to the share of the Government
under the settlement. If we try to interpret the settlement between the
parties, in a manner which the petitioner-company desire, the
Petitioner-Company gets 40% land plus land of the tenant which
would be contrary to the decision taken by the Government. One thing
is certain that under the settlement, the Government must get 60%
land free from all encumbrances and, therefore, the whole attempt to
foist the encumbrances of the tenant upon the land of the Government,
which is ultimately given to MHADA, is something which we do not
appreciate because the Government in good spirit, considering the
difficulty of the landlord, has settled the matter with allotment in the
ratio of 60:40. Thereafter again foisting encumbrances of the tenant
upon the land of the Government cannot be countenanced. To that
extent we are of the view that the Petition as filed is not bonafide.

4. The Petitioner has also challenged the reservation in the development

plan in favour of MHADA. We find that the said reservation has been
imposed by following proper procedure under the Maharashtra
 Regional Town Planning Act 1966. Apart from that, nothing has been
74
pointed out to us by the learned counsel for the Petitioner to show in
what manner the said reservation is bad and illegal. Therefore, so far as
the challenge to the reservation in favour of MHADA is concerned, we
do not find any substance in the said challenge. The Petitioners
proposal for development has been rejected in view of the reservation in
favour of MHADA. As indicated above, the area of 8000 sq. mtrs which
is to go to the tenant, would have to be form the 40% land allotted to
the Petitioner. Therefore, once the Petitioner hands over the said land
of 8000 sq. mtrs there should not be any impediment in considering the
petitioner’s proposal for development in respect of the balance of the
plot in its possession. We, therefore do not find any merit in the above
Petition which is accordingly dismissed.”

Note: In compliance of the aforesaid Order, an area totalling to 8000 sq.

mtrs. from out of the said land (i.e., 35,588.40 sq. mtrs.) was kept aside as
MHADA reserved land.

Copy of Order dated 21.07.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature

at Bombay in Writ Petition No. 5665 of 2009 is annexed herewith and
marked as ANNEXURE A - 1 (at pgs. 102 - 105).

E. That it was only thereafter that a Development Proposal for residential

project known as ‘COSMOS LOUNGE’ (hereinafter referred as “the said
Project”), was sanctioned on a portion of the said land ad-measuring
26,080 sq. mtrs.

Note 1: 8,000 sq. mtrs. of the said land referred to in the Order dated
21.07.2009 (supra) was not part of the said Project.

Note 2: The Appellant envisaged construction of the following (4)

buildings: -

1) Building No. 1 – Orchid (82 flats)

2) Building No. 2 – Angelica (77 flats)
 3) Building No. 3 – Hollyhock (77 flats)
75
4) Building No. 4 – Winter Garden (108 flats)

F. That on 20.04.2010, the Appellant made an application to the Thane

Municipal Corporation (“TMC”) for issuance of Occupation Certificate
(“OC”) for Building No. 2 i.e., Angelica.

G. That Meanwhile, the OC for Building No. 1 i.e., Orchid was granted by
the TMC on 04.08.2010, and the Appellant entered into Sale Agreement
at various occasions with various flat buyers.

Note: It is pertinent to note that initial building permissions (i.e.,

Commencement Certificate/ Sanction Plan etc.) were granted
unconditionally to the Appellant. Pertinently, the Appellant executed
Agreements to Sell with the Flatowners only after obtaining CC for all
the four Buildings. At the time, there was no occasion/ reason for the
Appellant to apprehend any delay in obtaining the OC for Buildings Nos.
2 – 4. Hence, possession of Flats in Building Nos. 2 – 4 were also handed
over to the Respondents.

H. That the Flatowners were aware right from the inception that the
Appellant eventually desired to building additional Buildings in the said
Project (i.e., apart from Building Nos. 1 – 4). The entire plan including the
additional Buildings was shown to the Flatowners and was in fact, even
included in the Brochure issued by the Appellant. Further, the
Agreements to Sale executed between the Flatowners and the Appellant
contained detailed terms and conditions wherein amalgamation of the
plots and utilization of additional FSI was contemplated. Indemnity
Bonds were also executed by the Flatowners in this regard.
The relevant portion from the Agreement to Sale between the Appellant
76
and one of the flat purchasers are extracted hereinbelow for ready
reference: -
“…
…
AND WHEREAS the Promoters have disclosed/shown to the
Purchaser/s the entire approved plans of contemplating construction of
several building and as such Purchasers is/are well aware of the fact
that development of the said property comprises of the development
project, which shall be done In phase-wise manner and as such, the
Promoters may make as and when required amendment to the said
presently approved plans and/or shall make re-location of the layout of
the said development scheme in their sole discretion by obtaining due
approval thereto from the said Corporation;

25) The Purchaser/s doth hereby declare and covenant with the
Promoters that he/she/they shall not treated any obstruction or
objection for utilizing any additional floor space index and/or other
benefits in terms of FSI and/or TDR while developing the said property
and/or any time even after completion of the present development
scheme in respect of the said property and as such, the Promoters, shall
be entitled to make use of all such additional/balance FSI and/or other
benefits, exemptions, etc. in respect of the said property and by utilizing
such FSI/benefits/exemption shall be entitled to carry on and
construct/erect any additional upper floors in addition to the presently
proposed upper floors and/or carry on the erection of any other
structure, building/s In and over the said property and/or to alienate
and transfer/dispose off all the premises, units, flats, etc. that shall be
situated In such additional floors/structures to any person of their
choice upon such terms and conditions and for such consideration as
may be deem fit and proper by the Promoters In their sole discretion.

32) The Promoters shall take all necessary steps to convey the said
property to the such co-op. housing society/association or apex body
which is to be formed in the abovementioned manner, however, the
Promoters shall not be liable to convey the said property to such
society/association or apex body unless and until the development of
 the said property by utilizing full FSI thereof, at present available
77
and/or which shall be available in future is utilized and consumed
and/or the FSI that shall become available by way of T.D.R. or due to
amalgamation is utilized and consumed; and all the flats, premises, to
be situated in the said building are sold and transferred and amount
due from such flat Purchasers are fully and completely paid by them
and/or each of them, to the Promoters. Till then neither the Purchaser
nor the Society/Association of the Purchaser/Apex body etc. shall be
entitled to make demand for the Conveyance in their favour from the
Promoter and/or the Owner/Confirming Party. While executing such
conveyance, the Purchaser/s shall be liable alongwith the other flat
takers of the said building for the payment of his/her/its/their
proportionate share In the stamp duty and registration charges the
shall be payable on such conveyance.

34) The Purchaser/s shall at no time demand partition of

his/her/its/their interest in the said building and/or the said property,
it being agreed and declared by the Purchaser/s that his/her/its/their
interest in the said premises is importable.

41) The Promoters shall be entitled to amalgamate the said property

with the adjoining or neighbourhood properties and by such
amalgamation, shall be entitled to make use of additional FSI for
constructing additional floors on the said building and/or any other
structures/buildings In the said property and/or shall also be entitled
to obtain and acquire T.D.R. of any other properties for construction of
additional upper floors on the building to be constructed on the said
property and for that purpose, further shall be entitled to make required
amendment and/or modifications in the said approved plans and shall
fur approval to such amendment/modification/revision from the said
Corporation without seeking any separate
approval/consent/permission from the purchaser/s herein; and in fact,
this clause itself shall be as such permission/consent.”

Copy of sample Agreement to Sell dated 27.08.2010 is annexed herewith

and marked as ANNEXURE A – 2 (at pgs. 106 - 140).
I. That thereafter, the Appellant made several reminders to the TMC for
78
issuance of OC for the Building No. 2 as well as for the Building No. 3
and Plinth Certificate of the Club House.

J. That in proceedings held under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land

Revenue Act, 1966, a further area of 8,000 sq. mtrs. was reduced from the
said land on 12.04.2011.

Note: Hence, on the said land which initially totaled 35,588.40 sq. mtrs.,
the situation on the ground was: -

i. An area of 8,000 sq. mtrs. was reserved for MHADA in terms of the
Hon’ble High Court Order dated 21.07.2009 (supra); and

ii. A further area of 8,000 sq. mtrs. was reduced in terms of the
aforesaid Order dated 12.04.2012.

Copy of Order dated 12.04.2012 passed by the Court of Sub Divisional

Office Thane Division, Thane is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE A – 3 (at pgs. 141 - 150).

K. That the TMC sought to reply to the Appellant’s letter dated 20.04.2010
only on 23.07.2012 i.e., after more than two years. Further, the TMC
erroneously sought to contend that NOC/ permission was required from
the ULC Department.

L. That In reply thereto, the Appellant was constrained to note as under: -

“2. … As mentioned in your letter, we would like to state that demand

for NOC from ULC authorities was never a condition till now, though
our application for Occupation Certificate was pending with the TMC
 since 2010. You are aware that the issue with regard to validity of
79
development schemes which were initially approved u/s 20 & 21 of the
erstwhile ULC act is pending for decision in the Supreme Court. As
mentioned in your letter, NOC from the ULC authorities is not related
to the issue pertaining to grant of Occupation Certificate and the said
condition cannot be a precondition for grant of Occupation Certificate.
…
…
…
5. We therefore hereby request you to withdraw your letter dated
23.07.2012 in order to avoid creating further unwarranted
complications in the matter. Without prejudice to our rights and
contentions, we once again request you to grant necessary permissions
for enabling the water-department for providing municipal water-
supply to the building Nos. 2 & 3 of the V.P. No. 2005/160 and also
for assessing the said building as authorized structures.”

M. That the TMC, however, continued to insist for a NOC from the ULC
Department inter alia, as under:

“… No objection certificate/permission from U.L.C Department and

after submission of the extension of order dated 27/1/89 by ULC the
department, the proposal for revised maps and use permit will be
considered.”

N. That meanwhile, Late Mr. Suraj Ramesh Parmar, who was a Partner of
the Appellant Firm, was constrained to give an undertaking dated
11.01.2013 that the issue in respect of the OC would be resolved soon as
under: -

“…

2. I state that the construction of the said building is done as per the
sanctioned plans and all other NOC's for grant of Occupation
 Certificate have been obtained from all concerned Departments of
80
Thane Municipal Corporation and requisite application dated
20/04/2010 for grant of Occupation Certificate have been submitted on
09/08/2010 for the said building before Thane Municipal Corporation.

3. 1 state that as such according to the Development Control Rules for

the City of Thane, the Occupation Certificate for the said building i.e.
Building Angelica is deemed to be granted on 22.09.2010.

4. I further state that we hereby undertake to resolve the issue regarding

Occupation Certificate in respect of the said building and are in process
of filing a Writ Petition in Hon’ble High Court, Bombay.”

O. That in view of the wholly illegal demand of the TMC, the Appellant in
January 2013 was constrained to file a Writ Petition bearing W.P. No. 178
of 2013 before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, inter alia, seeking the
following reliefs: -

“a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus

or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other Writ, Order or
direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for

(i) quashing and setting aside Government Resolution dated 23rd

November 2007

(ii) quashing and setting aside part of the Government Resolution

dated 15th October 1997 to the extent of it’s applicability only to the
schemes approved on or after 31st January 1990

(iii) granting benefit of Government Resolution dated 15th October

1997 to the Petitioner as prayed in application dated 8th February 2007

(iv) quashing and setting aside impugned Order dated 12th September
2012 passed by the Respondent No. 1 and 24th September 2012 passed
by Respondent No. 2

(v) directing the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to issue appropriate Order

thereby amending Order dated 27th January 1989 and restrict
allotment of flats to Government Nominees upto 5% and grant
extension of time to implement the scheme approved by Order dated
 27th January 1989 under section 20 (1) of the said ULC Act 1976 and
81
extended by Order dated 7th June 2004.

(vi) quashing and setting aside letter dated 23rd July 2012 and letter
dated 27th August 2012 issued by Respondent No.3/Corporation.

(vii) declaring that in view of Regulation No. 37 of the Development

Control Regulations 1984 occupation certificate for building nos. 2 and
3 is deemed to have been granted and direct Respondent No.
3/Corporation to grant and issue occupation certificate for building
nos. 2 as per application dated 20th April 2010 submitted on 9th August
2010 for building nos. 2 and application dated 9th September 2011 for
building No. 3”

P. That the Appellant also made an Application to TMC on 29.01.2013 for

OC for Building No. 4.

Q. That as things stood, the Appellant by virtue of its letters dated 18.03.2013
& 18.11.2013 sought approval for amended plans for the development of
its balance plot by amalgamating the same with land comprising VP No.
2005/160 (i.e., the portion of the said Land where the 4 buildings had
already been constructed) and by loading the FSI of the aforesaid Balance
Plot in VP No. 2005/160.

Note: A reminder for the same was also sent to TMC for the aforesaid
approval on 18.11.2013.

R. That at this stage, TMC sought to unilaterally impose a condition for

NOC from MHADA on 16.08.2014.

S. That MHADA granted a NOC to TMC on 24.03.2015.

Note: This was followed by a similar communication dated 23.03.2016

issued by MHADA.
T. That the Appellant was constrained to raise a protest on 15.06.2015 to the
82
Hon’ble Urban Development Minister, State Government due to the
unnecessary delays in granting permissions by the TMC. The Appellant
also submitted that TMC was contemplating charging penalty for grating
OC for the said Project. The Appellant submitted that even though they
were not liable to pay any penalty whatsover, it would be willing to pay
the penalty subject to the final outcome of W.P. No. 178 of 2013 filed by
it before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court (supra);

U. That on the basis of the aforesaid representation, the Hon’ble Minister on

10.07.2015 directed the TMC to evaluate the purported penalty as per
ready reckoner rate till date of Application of OC for buildings in the said
Project;

V. That the TMC sought to invoke a huge sum totalling to Rs. 7.02 crores as
“charges” for issuing the OC for Building Nos. 2 – 4. The aforesaid sum
included a sum of Rs. 95.36 lakhs towards ‘Labour Welfare Tax’;

W. The Appellant sought details on the bifurcation of the purported charges

contained in the aforesaid letter dated 22.09.2015 issued by the TMC.

Note: Further, by virtue of its letters dated 07.02.2017, 16.02.2017,

27.02.2017, 10.10.2017 and 26.03.2018 the Appellant expressed its
willingness to pay the ‘charges’ as sought for by the TMC albeit in
installments;

X. That thereafter, the Appellant wrote a letter on 02.03.2016 to the

Cooperative Housing Society of Building Nos., 2, 3 & 4 apprising them
about the prevailing difficulty in obtaining Occupancy Certificate.
 Note: The Appellant always acted in a bona fide manner and at no point
83
of time intended to hide anything from the Respondent Flat owners.

Y. That whilst things stood thus, the Respondents filed a Consumer

Complaint on 27.11.2017, bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, inter alia, praying
for the following reliefs:

“a) The Opponents be directed to furnish occupancy certificate and

execute conveyance. The Opponents be directed to pay compensation @
of Rs. 500/- per day to each flat purchaser from the date of formation of
society till execution of conveyance as per the list filed at Exh “C”.
b) The Opponents be directed to construct club house equipped with
latest gym equipments, squash court, pool table and table tennis.
c) The Opponents be directed to properly construct the swimming pool
along with all the necessary set up as described in paragraph no.
(V)(4)(A) of complaint application.
d) The Opponents be directed to pay an interest @18% on Rs. 20,000/-
to each flat purchaser from the date of payment till construction of club
house.
e) The opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2 Lacs along with
interest @18% as narrated in paragraph no. (V)(4) A of complaint.
f) The Opponents be directed to provide amphitheatre as mentioned in
Annexure N of agreement to sale.
g) The Opponents be directed to construct permanent gate, security
cabin and fence at the entrance as prayed in paragraph no (V)(4)(C)
h) The Opponents be directed to make necessary provision ensuring
that the water tanks meant for hollyhock society and winter garden
society are filled simultaneously by the overflow from fire water tank.
i) The opponents be directed to complete the internal repairs and
plastering of domestic water tanks with due finishing as per standard
practice. The opponents be also directed to clean remove the debris lying
 in the water tanks and ensure they are clean and free of debris and
84
foreign bodies.
j) The Opponents be directed to enclose the power substation as prayed
in paragraph no. (V)(4)(E)
k) The Opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5000/- per flat
purchaser by way of compensation for the mental and physical
harassment caused to them.
l) The Opponents be directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- by way of Cost of
litigation. …”

Z. The Ld. Commission while admitting the complaint filed by the

Respondents, was please to pass, inter alia, the following orders:
“Admit.
Issue notice of the admitted complaint to the opposite parties, asking
them to file their written version within the time prescribed under
section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Issue notice to the opposite parties on the application under section
12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act as well. …”

Copy of the Order dated 13.12.2017 passed by the Ld. NCDRC in CC

No. 3505 of 2017 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE A-
4 (at pgs. 151).

AA. That TMC dropped the demand to pay the ‘Labour Welfare Tax’
whereupon he Appellant timely paid charges totaling to Rs. 6.77 crores_
to the TMC.

BB. That the Appellant filed its reply on 06.04.2018 to the application under
Section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by the
Respondents in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017
before the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
CC. That the Appellant again wrote a letter on 08.05.2018 to the aforesaid
85
Housing Society, requesting for a meeting in order to get the pending
issues resolved.

DD. That furthermore, on 28.09.2018, the Counsel appearing for the

Appellant in C.C. No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld. Commission made a
suggestion to grant an opportunity to the parties to settle the matter
amicably.

The Ld. Commission while accepting the suggestion, inter alia, passed
the following orders:

“The learned Senior Counsel further submits that one chance for
voluntary amicable settlement be given, as the issue could be
voluntarily and amicably resolved.

In our considered view, let both the parties try for a voluntary amicable
settlement within a period of eight weeks. ..”

EE. That the Respondents on 29.10.2018 filed the amended complaint and
the revised application under section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505
of 2017 before the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission, inter alia¸ praying as under: -

“a) The Opponents be directed to furnish occupancy certificate and

execute conveyance. The Opponents be directed to pay compensation @
of Rs. 500/- per day to each complainant from the date of formation of
society till execution of conveyance as per the list filed at Exh “C”.

b) The Opponents be directed to construct club house equipped with

latest gym equipments, squash court, pool table and table tennis.
 c) The Opponents be directed to properly construct the swimming pool
86
along with all the necessary set up as described in paragraph no.
(V)(4)(A) of complaint application.

d) The Opponents be directed to pay an interest @18% on Rs. 20,000/-

to each Complainant from the date of payment till construction of club
house.

e) The opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2 Lacs along with

interest @18% as narrated in paragraph no. (V)(4) A of complaint.

f) The Opponents be directed to provide amphitheatre as mentioned in

Annexure N of agreement to sale.

g) The Opponents be directed to construct permanent gate, security

cabin and fence at the entrance as prayed in paragraph no (V)(4)(C)

h) The Opponents be directed to make necessary provision ensuring

that the water tanks meant for hollyhock society and winter garden
society are filled simultaneously by the overflow from fire water tank.

i) The opponents be directed to complete the internal repairs and

plastering of domestic water tanks with due finishing as per standard
practice. The opponents be also directed to clean remove the debris lying
in the water tanks and ensure they are clean and free of debris and
foreign bodies.

j) The Opponents be directed to enclose the power substation as prayed

in paragraph no. (V)(4)(E)

k) The Opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5000/- per

Complaint by way of compensation for the mental and physical
harassment caused to them.

l) The Opponents be directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- by way of Cost of

litigation. …”

Copy of the amended Complaint dated 29.10.2018 filed by the

Respondents before the Ld. NCDRC in CC No. 3505 of 2017 is annexed
herewith and marked as ANNEXURE A-5 (at pgs. 152 to 166).
 FF. That the Appellant thereafter filed its reply to the Amended Petition
87
filed by the Respondents in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC No.
3505 of 2017 before the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission.

Copy of Reply dated 03.11.2018 filed by the Appellant in CC No. 3505

of 2017 before the Ld. NCDRC is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE A- 6 (at pgs. 167 to 189).

GG. That meanwhile an application for grant of Occupation Certificate for

Building Nos. 2, 3 & 4 and Plinth Certificate of Club House was filed by
the Architect and also on 29.12.2018.

HH. That the parties could not arrive at any settlement. However, the
Counsel for the Appellant submitted before the Hon’ble Commission
that efforts for procuring the occupation certificate is on and the same
shall be ready within a month and will be provided in a short time.

Upon hearing the submissions, the Hon’ble Commission was please to

allow the application filed under Section 12 (1) (C) by the Respondents
and, inter alia, passed the following orders:

“…3. Heard the arguments on the application under Section 12 (1) (c)
of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The requirement under Section
12 (1) (c) is fulfilled in this case. Accordingly permission for a public
notice in terms of Section 13 (6) of the Act, 1986 read with Order 1
Rule 8 CPC be published in newspapers – ‘The Times of India’
(English), and ‘Maharashtra Times’ (Marathi), both stated to be
published from and circulated in Mumbai, for 06.03.2019. The public
notice shall be published in the font size ‘11’ or a bigger font size. The
application stands disposed of.

CC/3505/2017
 4. Consequent to grant of permission u/s 12 (1)(c) of the Act, 1986
88
the complaint is admitted, subject to just exceptions. ..”

Copy of the Order dated 05.12.2018 passed by the Ld. NCDRC in CC

No. 3505 of 2017 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE A-
7 (at Pgs. 190 to 191)

II. That in pursuant to the direction passed by the Ld. Commission, the
Respondents filed their Rejoinder Affidavit on 08.08.2019 in the
Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017 before the Hon’ble
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

JJ. That an application for grant of Occupation certificate for Building Nos.
2,3,4 and Plinth Certificate of Club House was filed by the Architect
followed by reminders dated 06.12.2019, 02.01.2020, 05.02.2021 &
27.05.2021.

KK. That also, an I.A. No. 15474 of 2019 for Impleadment was filed in the
Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017 before the Ld.
Commission by some 40 persons. Accordingly, the Impleadment
application was allowed on 16.01.2021 and the parties were directed to
be included in the list of complainants.

LL. That thereafter the Respondents filed their affidavit of evidence on

18.01.2021 in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017
before the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

MM. That another application bearing IA No. 1962 of 2021 was filed, seeking
impleadment in the Consumer Complaint bearing CC No. 3505 of 2017
before the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
 The Ld. Commission on 16.02.2022 was pleased to allow the Applicants
89
and were permitted to be impleaded as Complainants in the Complaint.

NN. That an Application for grant of OC for Building Nos. 2, 3 & 4 and Plinth
Certificate and Club House was filed by Architect to the TMC on
04.05.2022.

OO. That meanwhile, the application for grant of Occupation Certificate for
Building Nos. 2, 3 & 4 and Plinth Certificate of Club House was not
approved by the Statutory Authority.

PP. That thereafter, being aggrieved by the rejection of the Occupation

Certificate, the Appellant herein field the Writ Petition bearing W.P. No.
285 of 2023 before the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay on
17.12.2022, challenging the order of dated 12.07.2022, inter alia, praying
as under: -

“(a) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of certiorari or

a Writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order
or Direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, thereby
quashing and setting aside condition no 1 imposed by the Respondent
vide communication/ letter/order dated 12 July 2022 (Exhibit K hereto)
thereby directing the Petitioner to submit building proposal after
considering the land use as MHADA Housing Site 'A in respect of
plots of land bearing Survey No 59/A Hissa No 2/G/2/1 and Gat No
59/A Hissa No 2/H situated at Chitalsar, Manpada, Taluka and Dist
Thane vide Development Proposal No 2005/160;

(b) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or

a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ,
Order or Direction Article 226 of the Constitution of India, thereby
directing the Respondent to forthwith approve the revised Building
 Proposal dated 21 February 2022 and 4 May 2022 submitted by the
90
Petitioner vide Development Proposal No 2005/160 in respect of land
situated on Gat No 59A, Hissa 3B/1/1, 3B/1/2A, 3B/1/2B, 3B/1/2C,
3B/2/1, 3B/4/1, 3B/5, l6/3B/6, 2H, 2/G/2/1, 2/G/2/2, 16B/2/1/2/1,
16B/2/1/2/2 at Village Chithalsar, Manpada, Thane without insisting
for submission of Development Proposal after considering land use as
MHADA Housing Site ‘A’ as mentioned in condition no 1 of
impugned communication/letter dated 12 July 2022;

(c) that during the pendency and till final disposal of this Writ Petition,
this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent to undertake the
process of the Building Plans submitted by the Petitioner in terms of
the Representation made by the Petitioner;

QQ. That furthermore, the Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant

informed the Ld. Commission that the Application for the Occupation
Certificate had been rejected by the Statutory Authority vide Order
dated 12.07.2022 and the same has been challenged before the Hon’ble
High Court of Judicature at Bombay.

The Ld. Commission was pleased to pass inter alia the following order:

“Counsel for OP informs that Occupation Certificate has been rejected

by the Statutory Authority by order dated 12.7.2022. OP has
challenged the order before the High Court. He may produce the copy
of rejection as well as copy of Writ Petition alongwith affidavit, within
two weeks …”

RR. Meanwhile, the Occupation Certificate for Building Nos. 2 and 3 was
granted on 21.03.2023 as well as Plinth certificate for the Club House.
 NOTE: - The Occupation Certificate in respect of Building No. 4
91
continues to remain pending till date.

SS. By virtue of the Impugned Final Judgement and Order dated 12.06.2023,
The Ld. Commission has erroneously allowed the Complaint filed by
the Respondents in part, inter alia with the following directions to the
Appellant: -

“…
26. In view of the discussion above, the Consumer Complaint is partly
allowed with the following directions to the Opposite Parties to: -

“A. Obtain the Occupation Certificate for Building No.4 (Winter

Garden) within four months of this Order by filing application for its
grant with concerned authority exclusively for Building No.4 and the
club house;

B. Pay the Complainants/ allottees of Building Nos.2&3 (Angelica and

Hollyhock respectively) a delay compensation @ Rs.2.0 lakhs each,
within a period of four months, failing which an interest rate of 6% p.a.
would be levied on this amount from the date of this Order;

C. Pay a delay compensation of Rs.2.0 lakhs to the Complainants/

allottees of Building No.4 within four months of this Order, failing
which an interest rate of 6% per annum would be payable on this
amount from the date of this Order;

D. In case of delay of obtaining the Occupation Certificate for Building

No.4 (Winter Garden), beyond four months, the Complainants/
allottees of this Building shall be paid delay compensation @ 6% per
annum on their deposited amount from respective dates of taking
possession till the grant of Occupation Certificate. The amount of
 Rs.2.0 lakhs already paid as per Order above at (C) shall be adjusted
92
from this amount to be paid;

E. complete the construction of the club house within six months,

failing which a delay compensation @ 6% per annum on the deposited
amount for the club house by the allottees, shall be payable from the
date of this Order;

F. Complete all the amenities as given in Agreement for Sale within six
months.

27. On compliance of the Order as contained in the preceding

paragraph 26 sub-paras A to E, the Complainants/ allottees of the four
buildings shall give their consent letter (NOC) for further construction
by the Opposite Parties, within one month of such request by the
Opposite Parties, provided such construction fulfills the condition of
MOFA, Building Regulations of Thane Municipal Corporation,
Unified Development Control Rules and the permissible Floor Space
Index.”

TT. Hence, the present Civil Appeal

3. QUESTIONS OF LAW:

That the following questions of law arise for the consideration of this

Hon’ble Court:

I. Whether the Ld. NCDRC erred in holding that the Appellant was
guilty of providing deficient service to the Respondent Flatowners?
 II. Whether the delay in obtaining an Occupation Certificate was
93
attributable to any act of omission and/ or commission on the part
of the Appellant?

III. Whether the Ld. NCDRC erred in concluding that the Appellant
mixed the issues of sanction of revised plans with that of OCs when
in fact it was the TMC that was responsible for such conflation?

IV. Whether the Ld. NCDRC erred in concluding that the Appellant
mixed the issues of sanction of revised plans with that of OCs when
in fact it was the TMC that was responsible for such conflation?

V. Whether the Appellant can be held responsible for delay in

obtaining an Occupation Certificate, when such delay is attributable
solely to the Thane Municipal Corporation?
VI. Whether the Consumer Complaint filed by the Respondent
Flatowners was bad for non joinder of a necessary party i.e., Thane
Municipal Corporation?

4. GROUNDS:

The Appellant is challenging the impugned order on, inter alia, the

following grounds which are taken without prejudice to one another: -

A. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to appreciate that initial building

permissions (i.e., Commencement Certificate/ Sanction Plan etc.) were
granted unconditionally to the Appellant. Further, the Appellant
executed Agreements to Sell with the Flat owners only after obtaining
CC for all the four Buildings. At the time, there was no occasion/ reason
for the Appellant to apprehend any delay in obtaining the OC for
 Buildings Nos. 2 – 4. Hence, the Appellant could not be faulted for
94
having granted possession to the Respondent Flatowners;

B. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to consider that the Appellant always acted
in a bona fide manner and made various attempts to obtain the OC but
was thwarted by the wholly illegal and arbitrary actions of the TMC;

C. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to appreciate that the delay in obtaining the
OC for Building Nos. 2 – 4 and for Plinth Certificate of Club House was
entirely attributable to the administrative and bureaucratic lethargy on
the part of the TMC, which is the issuing Authority for an OC and no
blame ought to have been mulcted on the Appellant for the default(s) of
the TMC;

D. That the Ld. NCDRC erred in holding that the delay in obtaining OC
beyond 2015 was solely on account of the Developer;

E. That the Ld. NCDRC ought to have appreciated that it is not even the
case of the Respondent Flatowners or even of the TMC that the
Appellant had violated any building permission contained in the CC or
any other building permission;

F. That the Ld. NCDRC erred in partly allowing the Consmer Complaint
filed by the Respondents even after holding that the Appellant had
constructed all buildings as per the sanctioned plan and in the timelines
put forth in the Agreement to Sell executed between the parties;

G. That the Ld. NCDRC ought to have appreciated that the TMC put forth
a wholly unreasonable demand to the Appellant to supply permission
from the ULC Department, when, in fact, no such permission was
required at that stage;
H. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to appreciate that the TMC took over two
95
years to even reply to the Letter dated 20.04.2010 issued by the
Appellant;

I. That the Ld. NCDRC ought to have appreciated the fact that no NOC
was required from the ULC Department was evident from the fact that
eventually the OC was issued for Building Nos. 2 & 3 on 21.03.2023 i.e.,
after 12 years, without any NOC from the ULC Department;

J. That the Ld. NCDRC erred in holding that the purported addition of
two buildings had created problems;

K. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to appreciate that it is only when the
Appellant concluded construction of the 4 (four) buildings and after
having obtained an OC for Building No. 1, did the TMC start imposing
wholly arbitrary and illegal conditions for grant of OC to the Building
Nos. 2 – 4;

L. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to appreciate that after the Appellant had
already applied for the OC for Building Nos. 2 & 3, the State
Government by virtue of Order dated 12.04.2012 in proceedings held
under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Act, 1966, reduced
an area of 8,000 sq. mtrs. from the land where the said Project was being
developed, which led to the Appellant requesting the TMC for
permission to amalgamate their land;

M. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to appreciate that the despite the NOC of
MHADA, by virtue of their letter dated 12.07.2022, the TMC sought to
contend that the said Project was affected by MHADA inclusive
Housing Reservation;
N. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to appreciate that the Appellant had always
96
been vigilant in attempting to seek redressal against the various
unnecessary hurdles put forth by the TMC in granting building
permissions to the Appellant. To this end, the Appellant had filed Writ
Petition bearing W.P. 285 of 2023 (St./ No. 31893 of 2022) before the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court, inter alia, seeking to challenge the
communication dated 12.07.2022 issued by the TMC;

O. That the Ld. NCDRC ought to have appreciated that as soon as TMC
dropped the demand to pay the ‘Labour Welfare Tax’ amounting to a
whopping Rs. 95.36 Lakhs, the Appellant immediately paid all the penal
charges so as to obtain OC for Building Nos. 2 & 3;

P. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to appreciate that the Flatowners were
aware right from the inception that the Appellant eventually desired to
building additional Buildings in the said Project (i.e. apart from
Building Nos. 1 – 4). The entire plan including the additional Buildings
was shown to the Flatowners and was in fact, even included in the
Brochure issued by the Appellant. Further, the Agreements to Sale
executed between the Flatowners and the Appellant contained detailed
terms and conditions wherein amalgamation of the plots and utilization
of additional FSI was contemplated. Indemnity Bonds were also
executed by the Flatowners in this regard;

Q. That the Ld. NCDRC erred in mulcting the Appellant with a

tremendous burden to pay the Respondents Flatowners. Till date, the
Appellant has already expended a huge amount of money towards
penalty and other charges in obtaining the OC for Building Nos. 2 & 3.
Further, additional monies would be required for obtaining an OC for
Building No. 4;
 R. That the ld. NCDRC ought to have appreciated that the Appellant has
97
always acted in a bonafide manner and concluded the construction well
in time as per the Agreements executed between the parties. The
Appellant would be severely prejudiced in the event the impugned
Judgement is not set aside;

S. That whilst passing the impugned Judgement, whilst in para 23 the Ld.
NCDRC records the compensation amount as Rs. 1.5 Lakh to each
Respondents / Flat Owners, but later in para 26 the Ld. Commission
erred in increasing the compensation amount to Rs. 2 Lakh to each
Respondents / Flat Owners without any explanation or justification
whatsoever;

T. That the Ld. NCDRC ought to have considered that the delay in
construction of the club house as noted in the Impugned Order was only
due to lack of Plinth Certificate, which is granted by Thane Municipal
Corporation;

U. That the Ld. NCDRC failed to consider that the Appellant is not guilty
of any deficiency in service or has adopted unfair trade practices as
alleged by the Respondents.

5. That the Appellants have a good prima facie case on the basis of facts and

circumstances of the case stated above, and as such, irreparable loss and

prejudice would be caused to the Appellants if this Appeal is not

allowed.

6. That the Appellant has not filed any other Appeal or Petition challenging

the orders impugned in the present Appeal before any other Court or

before this Hon’ble Court.

 7. That the Annexures to the instant Appeal are true copies of their
98
respective originals.

8. That the prescribed Court fees have been paid on the present Appeal.

PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly

be pleased to:

(i) Admit and allow the Civil Appeal filed by the Appellant and set aside

the Final Judgement and Order dated 12.06.2023 passed by the Ld.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in C.C. No. 3505

of 2017.

(ii) Pass such order and orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and

proper under the facts and circumstances of the cases.

FILED BY:

KUSH CHATURVEDI
Advocate for the Appellant
PLACE: NEW DELHI
FILED ON: 31.07.20223
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
99
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. _______ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS … Appellant

Versus

APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & ORS. .... Respondent(s)

CERTIFICATE

“Certified that the Appeal is confined only to the pleadings before the

Hon’ble Court whose judgment is challenged and the other documents

relied upon in those proceedings. No additional facts, documents or

grounds have been taken therein or relied upon in the Appeal. It is

further certified that the copies of the documents / annexures, at as

A-1 to A-7, attached to the Appeal are necessary to answer the

questions of law raised in the petition and make out grounds urged in

the Appeal for consideration of this Hon’ble Court. The Certificate is

given on the basis of the instructions given by the appellant / person

authorized by the appellant whose affidavit is filed in support of the

Appeal.

FILED BY:

KUSH CHATURVEDI
Advocate for the Appellant
PLACE: NEW DELHI
FILED ON: 31.07.20223
 100
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. __ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS ... Appellant

Versus

APARNA DEEPAK PANDE &ORS.

Respondent(s)

AFFIDAVIT

I, Mr. Manish Mehta, aged about 51 years, the Authorized Signatory of

the Appellant, having Office at Cosmos House, Center Point, Sant
Dnyaneshwar Road, Panchpakhadi, Thane (W) 400602, do hereby
solemnly affirm and state as under:

1. That I am the authorized signatory of the Appellant in the

above-mentioned Civil Appeal and as such I am fully
conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and
hence, competent to swear by way of the present affidavit.

2. I state that, I have read the contents of the Synopsis and List
of Dates from Page B to BB and Civil Appeal from para 1 to 8
from pages 72 to 98 and the accompanying
Applications and state that the facts contained therein are
true to the best of my knowledge and belief as derived from
the record.
 101
That the Annexures annexed to the accompanying Civil
Appeal are true copies of their respective originals.

VERIFICATION

Verified at Thane on this the 26 th day of July 2023 that the contents of
the above Affidavit of mine are true and correct to my knowledge and
information. No part' of it is false and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.,

z. ij JUL l02.3
✓
I
-�OT�
•
-�
-���
-,f- S_
Ui"vf7A
Di st. r
h
e g n ,N a
o. 1
 ANNEXURE A-1 102

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5665 OF 2009

M/s.D Dahyabhai & Company : Petitioners.

Versus
The Municipal Corporation of the
City of Thane and anr. : Respondents.

Mr A A Kumbhakoni, a/w Ms.Gauri Godse for the Petitioner.

Mr.A R Pitale for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. V S Masurkar, GP, a/w Mr. V P Malvankar, AGP, for Respondent Nos.3
and 4.
Mr.G W Mattos, AGP, for Respondent No.2.

CORAM : S B MHASE &

R M SAVANT, JJ.
DATE : 21st July 2009

P.C.

1. It is an admitted fact that about 10 Hectares of surplus vacant

land held by the Petitioner from S.No.59, Chitalsar, Manpada, Thane had

been allotted by the Government to the Maharashtra Housing & Area

Development Authority unit Konkan Housing Board for housing

programme vide Government Letter dated 6.2.1987. It appears that

physical possession of 88,971 sq.mtrs of land was taken by the Konkan

Housing Board in 1988. This action was challenged by the landlord i.e.

Petitioner by filing Writ Petition No.1927 of 1988 which was dismissed.

 103
Against the said dismissal order the landlord filed Special Leave Petition

(Civil) No.6550 of 1988 wherein the Apex Court passed an order to

maintain status quo. While the said SLP was pending, the

Appellant/Petitioner gave a proposal relying upon Government Circular

No.APL­1088/(2797)/III, dated 28.8.1988 that the land in question

should be apportioned by 60 : 40 i.e. 60% land shall be taken by the

Government and 40% land will be retained by the landlord­Petitioner. It

appears that the said proposal was accepted by the Government, thereby

60% land came to the Government and 40% land remained with the

landlord­ Petitioner.

2. The Petitioner­Company, whilst challenging the reservation in

favour of MHADA in the development plan and the rejection of its

proposal for development of the plot which has come to its share, is

trying to claim that there was a tenant in the said land and the area of

the tenant admeasuring 8000 sq.mtrs should be considered from the area

of MHADA.

3. It is well settled that on acquisition the land which is to come

to the Government has to be free from all encumbrances. Therefore, the

60% of land which is to come to the Government has to be free from all
 104
encumbrances and therefore the encumbrance of tenant cannot be foisted

upon the land which has come to the share of the Government under the

settlement. If we try to interpret the settlement between the parties, in a

manner which the Petitioner­Company desires, the Petitioner­Company

gets 40% land plus land of the tenant which would be contrary to the

decision taken by the Government. One thing is certain that under the

settlement, the Government must get 60% land free from all

encumbrances and, therefore, the whole attempt to foist the

encumbrance of the tenant upon the land of the Government , which is

ultimately given to MHADA, is something which we do not appreciate

because the Government in good spirit, considering the difficulty of the

landlord, has settled the matter with allotment in the ratio of 60:40.

Thereafter again foisting encumbrance of the tenant upon the land of the

Government cannot be countenanced. To that extent we are of the view

that the Petition as filed is not bonafide.

4. The Petitioner has also challenged the reservation in the

development plan in favour of MHADA. We find that the said reservation

has been imposed by following proper procedure under the Maharashtra

Regional Town Planning Act 1966. Apart from that, nothing has been

pointed out to us by the learned counsel for the Petitioner to show in

 105
what manner the said reservation is bad and illegal. Therefore, so far as

the challenge to the reservation in favour of MHADA is concerned, we do

not find any substance in the said challenge. The Petitioners’ proposal for

development has been rejected in view of the reservation in favour of

MHADA. As indicated above, the area of 8000 sq.mtrs which is to go to

the tenant, would have to be from the 40% land allotted to the Petitioner.

Therefore, once the Petitioner hands over the said land of 8000 sq. mtrs

there should not be any impediment in considering the petitioner’s

proposal for development in respect of the balance of the plot in its

possession. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the above Petition

which is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/­ sd/­
[R.M.SAVANT, J] [S.B.MHASE, J]
ANNEXURE A-2 106
AGREEMENT FOR SALE

This AGREEMENT FOR SALE is made and entered into a THANE,

on this 27th ' day of AUG, 2010 and BETWEEN M/S. COSMOS
CONSTRUCTION, a partnership firm constructed and duly
registered under the Indian Pa�tnership Act,1932 having its office
at Shop No. 201/401, Arihant, above Sam Electronics Agyari lane,
Tembh Naka, Thane :- 400 601, hereinafter referred to as the
'PROMOTERS' (which expression shall unless it be repugnant to
the context of meaning thereof shall deem to mean and include its
existing and last surviving partner/s successor in title, executors,
administrator, and assigns) of the FIRST PART;

Mr. Yashwant Balkrishna Shinde adult/s and residing at Al/204,

Shubharambha Phase 2, Tikujiniwadi Road, Chiitalsar, Manpada,
Thane (W), 400 607, hereina,fter referred to as the
'PURCHASER/S', (which expression shall unless It repugnant to the
context or meaning thereof shall be deem to mean and Include
his/her/their respective heirs, executors, administrators . and
assigns) of the SECOND PART;

AND

M/S. D. DAHYABHAI & COMPANY PVT. LTD. a COfllpany

incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, havin g its
.. o.ffic1= at 121, Mittal Towers, C-wing 12th floor, Nariman Point
Mumbai - 400 021, through its authorized Signatory SHRI Surat R.
Parmar, Age 40 years, 0cc. Business, hereinafter referred to as
the 'OWNERS/CONFIRMING ,PARTY' (which expression shall unless
it be repugnant to the context of meaning thereof shall deem to
mean and include its existing Directors, last surviving Director/s,
successor in title, executors, administrators, and assigns) of the
THIRD PART;

WHEREAS by and under Deed of Conveyance dated 06-07-1960

registered under serial No.5387 with Sub Registrar of Bombay ori
07- 07-1960, hereinafter referred to as the 'FIRST CONVEYANCE';
and by and under Deed of Conveyance dated 06-07-1960 duly
registered under serial No.5386 with Sub Registrar of Bombay on
07-07-1960 hereinafter referred to as the 'SECOND CONVEYANCE',
 107
the Owners/Confirming Party herein purchased and acquired two
anas undivided share and fourteen anas undivided share
respectively, making it total share of sixteen has all the plots of
I·and, hereditaments and premises, know as MANP.ADA ESTATE
Thane, which properties are more particularly described in the
First and Second Conveyances in respective schedules thereof,
under the heading 'SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY ABOVE REFERRED
TO; hereinafter referred to as 'SAID ENTIRE PROPERTY;

AND WHEREAS the said entire property totally admeasuring acres

and 36.3/4th Gunthas approximately.

AND WHEREAS pursuant to the said first and second conveyance

the Owners/Confirming Party acquired lawful, peaceful and vacant
possession of the said entire property and became the absolute
and exclusive Owners thereof in exclusion of any right, title,
interest of previous owners of the said entire property;

AND WHEREAS at the material time and at all times, the plots of
land bearing Gut No.59/2 (Part), [also known as Gut No. 59/2B1/A
at the material time known as 59/A/2 (part)], Gut No.59/3 and
Gut No.59/16, totally admeasuring 88,971.00 sq. meters,
hereinafter referred to as 'SAID LARGER PROPERTY'; were forming
part and parcel of the said entire property;

AND WHEREAS after Implementation of Urban Land (Ceiling &

Regulation) Act, 1976, (hereinafter referred to as the 'ULC Act'),
the provisions of the ULC Act became applicable to the said entire
property, Including the said larger property;

AND WHEREAS the Owners/Confirming Party then were required to

file return dated 11/6/1976 of its total holding pertaining to said
entire property; including the said larger property under section 6
( 1) of the ULC Act. Thereafter, the order under section 8 (4) of
the ULC Act was issued on 19/7/1977, inter-alia, declaring
thereunder 3,10,079.00 sq. meters of land out of the said entire
property as a surplus vacant land. Thereafter, notification In
Government Gazette under section 10 (1) of the ULC Act, was
issued on 28-07-1977. Then notification under section 1 O (2) of
the ULC Act was issued on 29.04.1983 and notification under
 108
section 10 (3) of the ULC Act was published in Government
Gazette on 11-08-1983. Thus, the said surplus land out of the said
entire property deemed to have been acquired by the State
Government of Maharashtra with effect from 30-8-1983.

AND WHEREAS thereafter, vide special allotment order

No.AOL/1086/(301)/Desk/DV dated 06+02-1987, the Government
of Maharashtra allotted the said surplus land to Konkan
Grihanirman Kshetra Vikas Manda! established under the MHADA.
At the relevant time, the said larger property admeasuring
88,971.00 sq. meters was declared to be forming part of the said
surplus land, and as such, on 29-04-1988, the possession thereof
was taken over by MHADA by carrying out Panchanama.
Thereafter, an application dated 12 11 1988 was preferred by the
Owners/Confirming Party to the State Government of
Maharashtra; Inter-alia requesting the Government to allow the
Owners/Confirming Party to retain 40% out of the said larger
property with them for the purpose of development. The said
application of the Owners/Confirming Party was scrutinized by the
concerned authorities and thereafter, the Government of
Maharashtra under its order bearing No.AOL()L-1086/(301)/D.XV,
Housing & Special Awlatant Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai -
400 032 dated 27�01-X989 was pleased to pass order of
exemption under section 20 of the ULC Act; and as such, pursuant
to the said•order, an area admeasuring 35/588.40 sq. meters out
of the said larger property was allowed to be retained by the
Owners/Confirming Party for the development thereof; subject to
the terms and conditions, mentioned in the said order dated 27-
bi�-1989. Thereafter;
I
by and under
I
letter dated 07-04-1989
bearing No.ULC/TA/ULCTA/6.Chl.Manpada/89, the office. of
Competent Authority, Thane Urban Agglomeration, Thane,
restored the possession of 35,588.40 sq. meters of land
equivalent to 40% . out of the said · larger property to the
Owners/Confirming Party. To the said letter, a map showing 60%
land to be retained by" MHADA and 40% land to be restored and
exempted for development and to be retained by the
Owners/Confirming Party was annexed by the said Competent
Authority. It is specifically mentioned upon the said map that it is
 109
prepared pursuant to the state Government's letter bearing
No.AOL-1086/(301)-B dated 24th February and 4th March 1989
and the same Is based upon MR No.17/ 6-4-1983 prepared by
D.I.L.R. As shown in the said map and pursuant to the said letter
dated 07-04-1989, the possession was handed over
to Owners/confirming Party of said 35,588.40 sq. meters, out of
possession
'
the receipt dated 07-04-1989 and the fact of handing over
.
' , '

the possession was specifically written and acknowledged upon

the said map under the signatures of the Authority and the
Owners/Confirming Party. T�us, accordingly an area admeasuring
12, 730,90 sq. meters out of material times known as
Gut admeasuring 20,110.00 sq. meters as Gut No.59/2B 1/A] an
area
I
admeasuring 2,747.50 sq. meters out of the Gut No.59/ 3 and an
area admeasuring 2,747.50 sq. meters out of Gut No.59/ 16 (at
the material times known as Gut No.59/16B 1) thus, totally
admeasuring 35,588.40 sq. meters,_ out of the said larger property
came back in the possession of the Owners/Confirming Party and
stands exempted under section 20 of the ULC Act and made
available for development under ULC Act by the State Government
of Maharashtra. The true copy of the said map prepared by
MHADA dated 07-04-1989 Is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE 'A'. Upon Annexure 'A', the said 40% area exempted,
restored and allowed to be retained by the Owners/Confirming
Party is shown surrounded by red colour boundary line and by
describing the same by words '40%'. The said property
admeasuring 35,588.40 sq. meters denoted by words 40% on the
said map at Annexure 'A' and comprising of abovementioned Gut
Nos.59/2 [at the material times known as Gut N0.59/2B 1/A],
59/3 and 59/16, (at the material times known at Gut N0.59/16B
1) is hereinafter referred to as the 'SAID TOTAL PROPERTY', which
said total property is more particularly described In the
SCHEDULE-I hereunder written;

AND WHEREAS by and under the said order under section 20 of

the ULC Act, the Owners/Confirming Party are permitted to
develop the said property for the construction of tenements, which
shall be governed by the provisions of Maharashtra Ownership of
Flats Act, 1936 or by the Maharashtra Co-op. Societies Act, 1960
 110
and upon the terms and conditions, more particularly mentioned
in the said order, the copy of the said order dated 27/01/1989
passed under Section 20 of the ULC Act Is annexed herewith and
marked as ANNEXURE 'B'. The said possession receipt dated
07/04/1989 is also annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE
'C';

AND WHEREAS In. the premises aforesaid, the Owners/Confirming

Party were/are entitled to undertake the development scheme in,
over and upon the said total property pursuant to the said order
under section 20 of the ULC Act;

AND WHEREAS by an order bearing No.Mahsul/K-l/NAP/SR-

16 7 /2006 dated 18/11/2006, the Collector, Thane granted N. A.
permission in respect of the said total property subject to the
terms and conditions therein contained, the copy whereof is
annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE 'D';

AND WHEREAS the Promoters herein who are the registered

Partnership Firm, formed, constituted and registered under the
provisions of Indian Partnership Act and at the relevant time, were
caning on Its partnership business under the name and style of
M/S. MAHALAXMI ENTERPRISES, hereinafter referred to as 'SAID
PREVIOUS NAME', approached the Owners/Confirming Party herein
and agreed to acquire the development right of the said total
property, subject to condition that the Owners/Confirming Party
shall make out free, clear and marketable title to the said total
property;

AND WHEREAS parties then discussed and negotiated the terms

and conditions, Including the consideration and thereafter
registered Agreement for Development dated 20th May 2005 was
executed, which Is hereinafter refe,-red to as SAID AGREEMENT
and thereunder the Owner/Confirming Party herein granted the
development rjghts In respect of saic; total property to and in
favour of the Promoters herein, upon the terms and conditions and
for the consideration, more �articularly mentioned therein;
 111
AND WHEREAS said agreement was duly registered under serial
no. TNN 1-03195-2005 on 20-05-2005, with Sub Registrar, Thane-
1;

AND WHEREAS since at the relevant time the Promoters were

known by their said previous name, in the said Agreement the
promoters· are described by their previous name;

A ND WHEREA S pursuant to said Development A greement the

OWne·rs/Confirming Party herein �lso executed the registered
Power of Attorney dated 20/05/2005 In favour of the nominated
partners of the Promoters herein, interalia granting thereunder all
requisite power of development for the said total property in
terms of said agreement, including the power of substitution;

A ND WHEREA S said Power of A ttorr\e,, is also registered under

serial no.337/2005 with Sub Registrar c Thane-1, on 20/05/2005;

A ND WHEREA S in the saidA greement, iwer of A ttorney, the said

total property was described as SA ID PF -1PER.

AND WHEREAS at the relevant time, Mutation Entry No. 718 was
certified and pursuant to that new 7/ 12 extracts were created
interalia disclosing thereby the Owners/Confirming Party herein as
the ,,0lders of the said total property;

A ND WHEREA S said three 7/12 extracts were annexed to the said

Agreement;

AND WHEREAS the Promoters herein have thus become lawful

Developer of the said property and have initiated further steps in
terms of the said Agreement for the purpose of seeking approval
to the plans and for compliance of other responsibilities;
 112
AND WHEREAS the Promoters appointed the Architect, 'SUVARNA
GHOSH', Architect and Interior Designer, as the Architect of the
said project and have appointed R. C. TIPNIS as the Structural
Engineer for the development project of the said property;

AND WHEREAS pursuant to the rights and powers given vide said
Agreement and the Power of Attorney, the Promoters herein
submitted development proposal for approval to the said
Corporation under three different Vikas Prastav in respect of t:he
said total property;

AND WHEREAS at the relevant time, certain portion out of the.said

total property was affecting in the then proposed DP Road,
therefore in order to ascertain exact position of the said total
property and or affecting area thereof; one more Survey was
carried out through T.I.L.R; pursuant to the said survey, the said
total property came to be to be sub divided Into several portions;
and, accordingly by carrying out usual procedure, on or about
03/12/2005 Mutation Entry no. 744 was certified, inter-alia,
recording thereby the said sub division in respect the said total
property, the copy of the said ME No. 744 is annexed herewith, and
marked as ANNEXURE 'E';

AND WHEREAS the said total property came to be sub divided in

the following manner;

. Sr.No. Gut No. Hissa Past/Previous Area Sq. Ownership

No. Gut No. mtrs

1 59A/2G/1 59/2 (Pt) 7200.00 D.

Dahyabhai
&Co.(TMC
for Road) ■ •
2 59A/2G/2 59/2 (pt) 5530.00 D.

Dahyabhai
&Co.

3 59A/2H 59/2 (Pt.) 3250.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& Co.(TMC
for Road)
 113
4 59A/3B/1 59/3 (Pt.) .14800.00 D.

Dahyabhai
&Co.(TMC
for Road)

5 59A/3B/2 59/3 (Pt.) 1350.00 D.

Dahyabhai
&Co.(TMC
for Road)

6 . 59A/3B/3 59/3 (Pt.) 120.00 D.

Dahyabhai
&Co.(TMC
for Road)

7' ■■ ■ 59A/3B/4 59/3 (Pt.) 500.00 p.

[
Dahyabhai
&Co.(TMC
for Road)

8 59A/3B/5 59/3 (Pt.) 260.00 D.

Dahyabhai
1
& Co.(TMC
for Road)

9 59A/3B/6 59/3 (Pt.) 200.00 D.

Dahyabhai
&Co.(TMC
for Road)
10 59A/16B2/1/2/1 59/16 (Pt.) 700.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& Co.(TMC
for Road)

11 59A/16B2/1/2/2 59/16 (Pt.) 1200.00 D.

Dahyabhai
^ Co.(TMC
 114
for Road)
I

12 59A/16B2/1/2/3 59/16 (Pt.) 500.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& Co.

AND WHEREAS pursuant to the abo 1e mentioned sub division of the

said total property as aforesaid t 1ree under three different
development proposals under three i· dependent VP Files were
submitted of approvals to the Munici1>a! Corporation for the city of
Thane, herein after referred to - s 'SAID CORPORATION' particularly
under VP no. 2005/167; ✓P No.2006/160 and VP No.2006/09;

AND WHEREAS the Vikas Prastav subrnit ted under VP No.2005/160

is in respect of sub divided Gut no. 59 VSB/3B/l of original Gut
no.59/3 part) admeasuring 14f.Q(i square meters, Gut
No.59A/3B/2 (out of original Gut no.!,9; 3 part) admeasuring 1350
square meters, Gut No.59 A/3B/3 (ou: of original Gut no.59/3
part) admeasuring 120 square mete ·s, Gut No.S9A/3B/4 (out of
original Gut no.59/3 part) admeasur in�J 500 square meters, Gut
No.59 A/3B/5 (out of original Gut no. 5' /3 part) admeasuring 260
square meters, Gut No.59 A/3B/6 ()Lt of original Gut no.59/3
part) admeasuring 200 square meter,, Gut No.59 A/2G/1 (out of
original Gut no.59/2 part) admeasuri 19 7200 square meters, Gut
No.59 A/16B2/1/2/2 (out Of original Gut no.59/16 part)
admeasuring 1200 square meters thus totally admeasuring 25630
square meters, which is the portion out of said total property and
the same is hereinafter referred to as 'SAID PROEPRTY'; and the
same is the subject matter of this Agreement and Is more
particularly described in the SCHEDULE-II hereunder written;

AND WHEREAS the said Corporation has accorded approval to the

said plans, submitted under said VP No.2005/160 vide Reference
No. TMC/T.D.D.P./TPS/295 dated 11/8/2006, hereinafter
referred to as SAID APPROVED PLANS;

AND WHE�EAS as per the said approved plan, presently the

construction of 3 buildings Is contemplated, i.e. building No.1 (to
 115
be known as namely 'ORCHID') to be consisting of stilt + fourteen
upper floors and building No.2 (to be known as namely
'ANGELICA') to be consisting of stilt + twenty upper floors,
building No.3 (to be known as Holly Hock) to be consisting of
stilt­Sixteen upper floors and the Club· House;

AND WHEREAS the Promoters intend construct four or more

buildings on the said property by purchased the transferable
Development Rights (TDR) from some other properties and shall
be utilizing such TDR for further construction upon the said
property.

AND WHEREAS as aforesaid due to latest sub division of the said

total property, the revenue records have been once again altered,
as a result of which separate 7/12 extract in respect of each of the
sub divided portion of the said total property have been prepared
and/or issued by the concerned revenue authorities by following
requisite procedure;

AND WHEREAS accordingly new 7/12 extracts have been issued in

respect of the said property, which is the subject matter of. this
agreement and such new 7, 12 extracts are annexed herewith and
'
I

collectively marked as ANNEXURE 'F';

AND WHEREAS at the relevc\nt time, the title of the said total
property was investigated. by Advocate Shri. Sanjay
Shriram Borkar, who had issued a Title Certificate dated
20/5/2005, the copy whereof is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE 'G';

AND WHEREAS the Promoters have 'entered into with the said
Architect and the said R.C.C. Consultant requisite agreements as
per the usual practice and procedure·;

AND WHEREAS vide Deed of Admission cum Retirement

dated 06/02/2007, the constitution of the Promoter Firm has
been changed and has been duly registered with Registrar of
Firms at Mumbai;

AND WHEREAS pursuant admission of new partners in

the promoter firm, previously nominated partners, who
were appointed as constituted attorney under said Power of
Attorney
 116
dated 20/05/2005, executed substituted Power of Attorney
dated 6/2/2007, registered under serial No.92/2007 on
1

6/2/2007, with

Sub-Registrar, Thane in favour of Shri SuraJ Ramesh Parmar &

Shri Manish Gyanchand Mehta and thereunder •conferred up6n
them all the powers granted by the owners/confirming party to
them, to and In favour of said substituted attorneys and thereby
the said substituted ·attorneys have become ent;itled to execute
this Agreement on behalf of the owner/confirming party;

AND WHEREAS the change in the name.of the Promoters firm, i.e.
from previous name of M/S MAHALAKSHMI ENTERPRISES to M/S
COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS has been duly registered and recorded
with the Registrar of Firms and a certificate to that effect issued
by the Registrar of Firms Is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE 'H';

AND WHEREAS the Commencement Certificate issued by the �aid

Corporation In respect of the building/s to be constructed on the
said property is also annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE
'I' as well the copy of the said approved plan is also annexed
herewith and marked as ANNEXURE 'J';

AND WHEREAS pursuant to the abovementioned approvals, the

promoters have undertaken the construction work of the new
buildings upon the said. property as p�r the said approved plans
and the constr,u ction work thereof is in progress;

AND WHEREAS the Promoters have sole and exclusive right to sell
the flats, shops, parking spaces, office premises, open space
parking, stilt, etc. In the said buildings being erected on the said
property and to enter into agreements with the Purchaser of the·
flat / shop / parking space / office premises / open space
parking/stilt, etc. and to receive the consideration in respect
thereof;

AND WHERAS the Purchaser/s herein was/were interested in

purchasing and acquiring the premises suitable to his/her/their
needs and purposes In the vicinity of the said property, and
having came to know about the develbpment of the said prop¢rty
by the Promoters, approached the Promoters and showed
 117
his/her/their willingness to purchase and acquire on ownership
basis, the premises to be situate in the buildings being erected on
the said property;

AND WHEREAS the Promoters have disclosed/shown to the

Purchaser/s . the entire approved plans of contemplating
construction of several building and as such Purchasers is/are well
aware of the fact that development of the said property comprises
of the development project, which shall be done in phase-wise
manner and as such, the Promoters may make as and when
required amendment to the said presently approved plans and/or

y shall make re-location of the layout of the said development

scheme in their sole discretion by obtaining due approval thereto
from the said Corporation;

AND WHEREAS the Promoters have also specifically disclosed to

the Purchaser/s that the developme�t of the said property iJ the
part and parcel of the development of the said total property and
the Promoters may either develop the said property singularly
and/or In common and/or in amalgamation with the balance
property out of the. said total property and/or in phased-wise
manner;.

AND WHEREAS the Purchaser/s has/have been also made aware of

the fact that In the said development scheme certain premis�s are
. t.o.. be allotted to the nominated person/s of the Government of
Maharashtra as' mentioned in the said ULC Order dated 27/1/1989
as well as about various terms and conditions imposed therein;

AND WHEREAS with the knowledge of all these facts and being
satisfied about the entire development scheme and about the
rights of the Promoters herein; and ,after inspection of the plans
and amenities to be provided to the respective fiats, and being
Interested in purchasing and acquir.i ng one flat, being the flat
No, 19B to be situ·ate on 18 th floor of an area admeasuring about
889 Sq. feet (carpet), in the building to be known as 1.
Orchid, 2. Angelica, 3. Holly Hock, 4. Winter -garden, Wing,
which flat is hereinafter referred to as 'SAID PREMISES', and
requested to the
 118

Promoters to sell and allot the said premises to him/her/them and

the parties then after negotiations finalized the lumpsum
price/consideration, which is Rs, 58,30,000/ (Rupees Fifty Eight
Lacs Thirty Thousand only) and to be paid in manner mentioned in
the operative part of this Agreement: ALLOTTED WITH STACK
PARKING.

AND WHEREAS the Purchaser/s demanded from the Promoters and

the Promoters have given inspection to the purchased of all the
document� of title relating to the said property and the plans,
designs and specifications prepared by Promoters aforesaid
Architect and of such other documents as are specified under the
MOF Act and the rules made there under;

AND WHEREAS the Promoters have displayed and/or kept Xerox

copies of all the documents, plans and specifications referred to in
clauses (a), (b) & (c) of sub section (2) of section 3 of the said
Act, at the site and permitted the Purchaser to take Inspection
thereof;

AND WHEREAS the said premises. which as aforesaid has been

agreed to be sold to the purchaser as aforesaid and subject to
terms and conditions mentioned herein, is shown in the typical
floor plan annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE 'K' and
shown by green colour boundary line;

AND WHEREAS the Promoters are entering and will enter Into
separate Agreement with several other person/s and parties for
sale of other flats /premises/parking slots /space to be
constructed In the said new building In and over the said
property;
 119
AND WHEREAS the Purchaser/s hps/ha\1e Inspected the said • i

property and has himseif/herself/themselves fully acquainted with

the state :hereof and Is/are fully .satisfied about the right, title
and I:1terest of the Promoters in, over and upon the said property
and/or its development and after such satisfaction, has/t,ave
agreed to 3cc;uire the said premises from the Promoters on what
Is popularly known as 'OWNERSHIP BASIS' at and for the
lumpsum :Jrice and on the terms, conditions and ccvenants
mutually agreed u:Jcn by and between the parties heretc and
he-eirafter contained

NCW THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH AND IT IS HEREBY AGREED

BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES HEREIN AS JNDER:

1) The Fromoters shall construct the said bui,dings on the said

property in accordance with the pla1s, designs, specifications
approved by the Seid Corporation an:: whi:h rave been seer. and
api:rnved by the P'Jrchaser/ with only such variations and
modifications as the Fromoters may corsider necessary or as may

be required by the said corporation/the Go-vernment to be ma:le in them

or any of them. The Purchaser/s doth heret:y give
his/he-/their consent for making any such variation and
mo:lification and/or additions and alterations in the plans and
specifi::ations of the said building. This ::onsert shall be treated as the
consent gi·1en b·{ �he Purchaser/s as provided under Section 7 of the
said Act. The Promoters shall be free and absolutely entitled to
construe� any additional floors in a.1d upon the said propped new
tuildings :ind/or shall also be entitled to construct any other add:tio:ial
building/s upon the said property .. by obtaining such other and
furt1er FSI as per the development control rules and regulations of
the saic Corporation and/or t-y obtaining the T.D.R. and/or FSI of :iny
otrer property and/or by c:,btaining the F5I of the nei;;ihbodrhood
prcperties and/or by amalgamation of the said proi:erty with the
neighbourhood properties and/or in any other mar ner whatsoever.
The Promoters shall =urti1er be entitled to change the present layout
and relocate the locations of the said buildin£s, _other common areas,
facilities, location of club house, access road, garden, etc. at any
time and/or at all times till completion of the entire development
project of the said property
 120

and/or the s9id total property by consumption of all presently

available FSI or future FSI including the TOR, etc. The completion
of one building and/or obtaining of occupation certificate of such
building will not be treated or construed as completion of tHe
development scheme of the said property �nd even after
obtainment of such occupation certificate, the Promoters being the
in-charge of the development project, shall continue to have all
right of relocation of layout plan and/or relocation of R.G. areas,
garden, access road, etc. till completion of entire development
project, as aforesaid; of said property and/or said total property.
The Purchaser/s doth hereby give his/her/their irrevocable
consent/no objection for construction of additional construction by
the Promoters in and over the said new buildings as well as fort the
relocation and for making changes in the layout, R.G. area, garden
and other common amenities and area etc. in the manner as
aforesaid.

2) The Purchaser/s hereby agree/ to purchase from the Promoters

and the Promoters hereby agree to sell to the Purchaser/s one Flat
No.19B situated on 19th floor, of carpet area admeasuring 889
sq.feet (carpet), in the building to be known as 1. Orchid, 2,
Angelica, 3. Holly Hock, 4. Winter Garden, Wing - (which is
inclusive of the area of balconies to be erected/being constructed
on the said property, in the project to be known as 'COSMOS
LOUNGE' and as shown in trye floor plan annexed herewith and
marked as mentioned herein below as ANNEXURE 'K' by hatched
lines and more particularly described in Schedule II hereunder
written, which flat premises, is hereinafter referred to as "SAID
PREMISES" for the lumpsum price of Rs.58,30,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Eight Lacs Thirty Thousand Only).

3) The abovesaid lumpsum price Is Inclusive of the price payable

against the said premises as well as a_gainst the undivided
proportionate share of the Purchaser/s created in the common
areas and facilities, in the manner mentioned hereinafter as well
as Inclusive of the cost of extra amenities, which the Promoters
have agreed to provide to the Purchaser/s to the said premises,
The Purchaser/s understand/s and know/s that the said property
Is being developed as per the conditions Imposed in exemption
 121
orpe� under section 20 of the ULC Act. In the circumstances and
as per the guidelines, the Promcters were Intending to provide to
the said premises the basic LSJal amenities, as per the list
annexed herewith and marked as A.NNEXURE 'L'. The Purchaser/s
however, expressed his/her/their desire to have ultra modern
and/or additional amenities to the said premises, in addition to the
said amenities mentioned in Annexure 'L' and agreed to pay extra,
and additional cost for the sa11e., The Purchaser/s have also
requested for providing additona amenities and structural
strength ultra modern facilities ta the said buildings alsc and
agreed to incur and pay additional c'larges/costs in promotion to
the area of the said flat alon� with other purchasers. The
promoters have then accepted the said reque5t, and accorjing,
both the parties have mutu:illy agreed upon list of such extra
amenities as well as the cost t1ereof. T:1e said list of
extra/additional amenities is more Jarticularly described in the list
of Additional Amenities, v.,ihich is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE 'M'. The Promcters hzve also Informed to the
Purchaser/s that the said property is presently barren plot of land
and as such, the Promoters shall be required to incur huge
expenses for infra-structural development thereof. The Promoters
shall also be providing various other facilities such as club house,
gymnasium podium garden/landscape garden Internal tar roads
etc. to the said project c,f the development of the said pr-:>p-erty.
The Promoters as per the above stated request of the purchaser,
have also agreed to Incur additional expenses for making the said
building ultra modern. In the circumstances the Promoters are
have agree to create the prop::>rtiona�e undivided share of the flat
purchasers of the said project In such common areas and
facilities. The said common area5 and facilities are more
particularly described in ANNEXURE N annexe:! herewith. Thus
while mutually arriving at abovesaic iumpsum price, above stated
aspects have been considered and t1us the said lumpsum price Is
broadly divided under three categcries i.e. a) the price of the said
premises, b) proportionate pr ce for the undivided share In the
common areas and faciliti<2s and c) additional costs for the extra
and additional amenities to be provided as aforesaid as per
Annexure "M" to -the saic' premises,· as per the request of the
 122

Purchaser/s. The Purchaser hereby confirm for the bifurcation of

the lumpsum price under above stated three heads and admit not
to raise any grievances In that regard anytime In future and agree
· to pay the said lumpsum price In the manner as mentioned
hereinbelow.

4) The Promoters have requested the purchaser/s to pay lumpsum

purchase price as per the details given below and the Purchaser/s
has/have agreed to pay the aforesaid purchase price in time; and,
accordingly the abovesaid purchase price is fixed and finalized

S.No. Description Amount-RS

a) Paid on or before execution 8,74,500/-
hereof (15%)
b) On completion of plinth (4%) 2,33,200/-
c) On casting of 2na slab (4%) 2,33,200/
d) On casting of 4th slab (4%) 2,33,200/
e) On casting of 6th slab (4%) 2',33,200/
f) On casting of 8th slab (4%) 2,33,200/
g) On casting of 1am slab {4%) 2,33,200/
h) On casting of 12th slab {4%) 2,33,200/
i) On casting of 14th slab {4%) 2,33,200/
j) . m
On casting of 16 slab (4%) 2,33,200/-
k) On casting of 18th slab (4%) 2,33,200/
l) On casting of 20th slab (4%) 2,33,200/
m) On completion of Brick work 4,66,400/-
(8%)
n) On· completion of internal and 4,66,400/-
external plaster (8%)
o) On commencement of plumbing 4,66,400/-
work (8%)
p) On commencement of electrical 4,66,400/-
work (8%)
q) At the time of handing over 5,24,700/-
possession of the said premises
(9%)
TOTAL 58,30,000/-
 123

5) T he Promo:ers doth here:>y admit and acknowle::lge the receipt of

the amount as mentioned In clause (a) above and doth hereby
release and discharge the Purchaser/s from the payment thereof
and or every part the-eof. The balance cons·derat;on amountjng �o
Rs.55,79,000/-(Rupees Fi�h Five Lacs Seventy Nine Tho.Jsand
. .· .

Only) shall be payable by the Purchaser/s to the Prbmoters :n the

manner contended hereinabove. T he Purchaser/s has/have been
informed by that all payment payable as per abovesaid
instalments shall be paid by A/c payee cheque or DEMAND D�AFT,
PAYABLE IN THE NAME OF T HT E PROMOT ERS HEREIN. T ime sl"all
be the essence of this contract. The Purchaser/s shall not ccmmit
any delay and/or default in the payment of any of the instal:ment
hereinabove. After c:,mpletion of plinth and/or respective slab
and/or maturing of respective instalment in the manner mentioned
hereinabove, the Promoters shall issue a letter In writing tc that
effect at the address of the purchaser/s mentioned hereina:Jove.
Such letter shall be sent by U.C.P. and upon issuance of such
:etter by sh3ll by U.C.P. It shall be presumed that the provision of
:ssuance of notice mentioned herein hes been duly compiled with.
Upon issuance of such letter, the respective instalment shall be
paid within 7 days �rc,m the date of issuance of ietter. In case, if
any delay and/or default is committed by t1e Purchaser/s in the
payment of such Instalment, the Promoters shall be entitled to
take all such steps fo' breach of cortract as contemplated under
the provisions of law. In addition to such ste;>s and without
prejudice to the right to take such steps for breach of contract,
the Promoters shall also be entitled to the interest O 21 % per
annum for the delayed period in respect of each such Instalment,
the payment whereof shall be delayed.

6) T he specification of the said building, In which the said premises

Is situate as well cs list of amenities to be provided to the said
premises and the nature and description ar.d extent of common
areas and facilities and/or limited cc,mmon area and facilities If
any, are more particularly described In Annexu-e 'L' hereunder
written. The Owner/Ccnfirming Party herein confirm allotment of
the said premises in the name of Purchaser in the manner as
mentioned by the Promoters herein.
 124

7) The Promote rs shall give posse ssion of the said pre�ises to the
Purchaser/s on or before May-11. However, the Promoters shall be
entitled to reasonable extension of time for giving deiivery of the
said premises on the aforesaid UK date, If the completion of
building In which the said premises are to be situated Is delayed
on account of:

a) Non-availability of steel, cement, other building material, water or

electricity supply.
b) War, civil commotion order of God;
c) Any notice, order, rule, notification of the Government and or
other public or competent authority said Corporation and/or the
Court of law.

8) Any other circumstances beyond the control of the Promoters.

9) The Purchaser/s shall take possession of the said premises within

FIFTEEN days of the promoters giving written notice to the
Purchaser/s (by U.P.C.), intimating that the said premise s are
ready for use and occupation. From the date of issuance of such
notice, the Purchaser/s shall be liable for the payment of all
outgoings such as maintenance charges, cess, taxes, etc. In
respect of the said premises. In case :o any reason at the request I

of the purchaser, the Purchser is give 1 liberty to enter Into the

said premises for doing furniture wor=-:s, then from the date of
such liberty, the Purchaser shall becoin-� liable for the payment of
the above stated charges.

10) If within a· pe riod of one year from t:11:: date of handing over the
said premises to the Purchaser/s, the Purchaser/s brings to the
notice of the Promoters any structurol defect in the said premises
or the building In which the said p:-emises are situated or the
nia.terial used therein In the construction of the ·said building, I

then, wherever possible such defects shall be rectified by the

Promoters at their own cost.

11) The Purchaser/s shall use the said premises or any part thereof or
permit the same to be used only for purpose of residence.

12) The Purchaser/s along with other purchasers of flats premises In

the building shall join in forming and registering the Society or a
 125

Limited Company to be known by name, i.e. 'COSMOS LOUNGE'

and/or by the individual name of the building in which said
premises is situate, in case if separate Society of such bu:lding is
formed and registered and for this purpose from time to time sign
and execute the application for registration and/or membership
and other papers and documents necessary for the formation and
the registration of the Society or Limited Company and for
becoming a member, including the bye-laws of the proposed
Society and duly filled in, sign and return to the Promoters within
·sEVEN days of the same being forwarded by the Promoters to the
Purchaser/s so as to enable Prooters to register the organization
as per the rule 8 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation
of the promotion of construction, sale, management and transfer)
Rules, 1964. No objection shall be taken by the Purchaser/s if any
change or modifications are made in the draft bye law s or the
Memorandum and or Articles of Association, as may be required
by the Registrar of Co-operative s'ocieties or the Registrar of
Companies, as the case may be, or any Competent Authority;

13) Commencing a week 3fter notice in writing is given by the

Promoters to the Pur:haser/s that the said premises are ready for use
and occupation, the Purchaser/s shall be liable to bear and pay the
proportionate share (i.e. in proportion to the floor area of the said
premises) of all outgoings In respect of the said, property and Building/
s namely local taxes, betterment charges or such other charges that
shall be levied by the said Corporation and/or Government, water
charges, Insurances, common lights, repairs and salaries of clerks,
bill collectors, chowkidars, sweepers, maintenance charges of dub
house and other common amer.ities etc. and all other expenses
necessary and Incidental to the management and maintenance of the
said property and building/s. Until the Society/Limited Company/apex
body is formed and the said property and buiiding/s transferred to
it, the Purchaser/s sha ii pay to the Promoters such proportionate
share of ou�goings as may be determined by the Promoters. The
Purchaser/s further agrees that till the Purchaser/s share is so
determined, the Purchaser/s shall pay to the Promoters
provisional monthly contributions of Rs.3 per sq. ft. per month towards
the outgoings.
 126

The amounts so paid by the Purchaser/s to the Promoters shall not

carry any interest and remain with the Promoters until the
conveyance is executed in favour of the society or a limited
company or apex body as aforesaid. Subject to the provisions of
section of the said Act, on such conveyance being executed the
aforesaid deposits (less deductions provided for this Agreem�nt)
shall be paid over by the Promoters to the Society or the Limited
Company or apex body, as the case may be. The purchaser/s
undertakes to pay such provisional monthly contribution and such
proportionate share of outgoings regularly on or before the 10 th
day of each and every month in advance and shall not without the
same for any reason whatsoever.

14) The Purchaser/s or himself/herself/th�mselves with I ntention to

bring al! persons Into whosoever hands the said premises may
come, doth hereby covenant with the Promoters as follows:

a) To maintain the said premises at the Purchaser/s's own cost In

good tenantable repair and condition from the date of possession
of the said premises taken and shall not do or suffered to be done
anything in or to the building In which the said premises are
situated, and/or staircase or any passages which may be against
the rules, regulations or bye-laws of concerned local or any other
authority or change/alter or make addition in or to the building In
which the said premises are situated and the said premises itself
or any part thereof.

b) Not to store in the said premises any goods which ar� of

hazardous, combustible or dangerous nature or are so heavy as to
damage the construction or structure of building in which the said
premises are situated or storing of which goods is objected to by
the concerned local or other authority and shall not carry or cause
to be carrJed heavy packages which may damage or likely to
damage the staircases, common passages or any other structure
of the building in which the said premises are situated including
entrances of the building in which the said premises are situated.

c) Not to change the elevation of said building in' any manner

whatsoever.
 127

d) To carry at his/her/their own cost all internal repairs to the said

premises and maintain the said premises in the same conditions,
state and order in which it was delivered by the promoter:s to the
purchaser/s and shall not do or suff<; d be done anything in or to
the building In which the said premises are situated or the said
premises which may be against the rules and regulations and bye­
laws of the said Corporation or the other public authority. In the
event of the Purchaser/s committing any act in contravention of
the above provision, the Purchaser/s shall be responsible and
liable for the consequences arising therefrom.

e) Not to demolish or cause to be dem J: shed. the said premises or

any part thereof, or any portion of the said building nor at any
time make or cause to be made any addition or alteration of
whatever nature in or to the said premises or any part thereof,
nor any alteration In the elevation and outside colour scheme of .
the building in which the said premises situated and shall keep the·
:
portion, sewers, drains pipes in the said premises and
appurtenances thereto in good tenantable repair and condition,
and in particular, so as to support shelter and protect the other
parts of the buildings in which the said premises are situated and
shall not chisel out or in any other manner cause damage to
columns, beams, walls or slabs or RCC, Pardis or other structural
members in the said premises without the prior written permission
of the Promoters and or the Society or the Limited Company.

f) Not to do or permit to be done any Act or thing which may render

void or voidable any insurance of he said property and the
building in which the said premises situated or any part thereof or
whereby any increased premium shall become payable in respect
of insurance.

g) Not to throw dirt, rubbish, rags, garbage or other refuse or permit

the same to be thrown from the said premises in the compound or
any portion of the said property and the building in which the said
premises are situated.

h) To bear and pay Increase in local taxes, water charges, Insurance

and such ot her levy, if any, which are/Shall be Imposed by the
 128

said Corporation and/or Government and/or other public authority,

on any account whatsoever.

i) to bear and pay any Increase in the purchase price in case of

escalation or hike in the cost of the buildings material, cenient and
price of Infrastructure activities.

15) The Purchaser/s shall observe and perform all the rules and
regulations which the society or the Limited Company may adopt
at its Inception and. the additions, alterations or amendments
thereof that may be made from tirr.e to time for protection and
maintenance of the said building and the flats' therein and for the
observance and performance of the Building Rules, Regulations
and bye-laws for the time being in force of the said Corporation
and/or Government and other Government Bodies. The
Purchaser/s shall also observe and perform all the stipulations and
conditions laid down by the Society/Limited Company regarding
the occupation and use of the said premises in the punctual
towards the taxes, expenses or other out-goings in accordance
with the terms of this Agreement.

16) Till the conveyance of building in which the said premises are
situate is executed, the Purchasers shall permit the Promoters and
their surveyors and agents, with or without workmen and others,
at all reasonable time to enter into and upon the said property
and buildings or any part thereof to view and examine the state
and condition thereof.

17) The stilt portion, open spaces, parking slots and/or terrace of the
said building shall belong to the promoters, who alone shall have
the right to deal with or dispose off the same. Unless the stilt
area/parking slots are specifically allotted to· the Purchaser/s in !
writing, the Purchaser can not claim any right of parking.

18 ) Until such time the possession of the said property and the said
building Is delivered to the proposed society and/or organization
and/or limited company or apex body by executing conveyance,
the Purchaser/s shall abide by the Rules and Regulations framed
or to be framed at any time and from time to time and at all times
by the Promoters and generally to do al! and every reasonable act
 129

that the Promoters may call upon the Purchaser/s to do and carry
out.

19) It is agreed that till ail the flats/open parking spaces, and other
premises are sold and/or allotted to the prospective purchasers,
the Promoters shall be entitled to retain with them unsold
=Iats/open parking spaces, and other premises and no
maintenance charges and taxes and other outgoings would
become payable by the Promoters in res�ect of the unsold
flats/open parking spaces, and other premises and neither the
Purchaser/s nor the Co-op. Housing Society or apex body and/or
such other association to be formed of the Purchasers shall
claim/demand/charge from the Promoters any amount towards
such maintenances/taxes and other out£oings In respect of the
flat open µarking spaces, and other premises in respect :if the
period from the date of occupation certificate till the same are
said in the respective �urchasers .

.20) ?h� _Pr�moters shall mai.,tain a separate account in respect of sums

received by the Promoters from the Purchaser/s as advance or
ceposit, sums received on account of the share capital for the
formation of the Co-operative1 Society or c Company or apex body
or towards the outgoings, legal charges and shall utilize tl1e
amounts only for the purpose of which they have been received.

21) The Purchaser/s doth hereby declare and assure to pay the
Promoters the following amounts besides the purchase price
consideration, at the time of execution of these presents:

a. Rs.511/­ for the Entrance Fee as well as Share Application

b. Rs.3000/­ for Legal Charges for preparati-:m of Agreement
C. Rs.4000/- For expenses for formation of the Society.
d. Rs.35560/- for M.S.E.B. & S.L.C. Charges payable on or before
cor.ipletion of RCC work (Rs.40/- on carpet area)
e. Rs.28448/- for Advance of Maintenance charges (Rs.32/- p.a. on
carpet area)
f. Rs.35560/- for Development Charges (to be paid at the time of
execu:ion hereof) @ 40/-on carpet area
g. Rs.4000/- Water li,,e charges
h. R.s. 20,000/- Grills Charged
 130
i. Rs.20,000/- Club house membershir charges
j. Rs.6,223/- Capitation fees (Rs.7/- r·er sq.
ft.carpet)
Total Rs.1,5 7,302/- (Rupees One Lac fifty Seven Thousand
Three Hundred Two Only)
22) The Purchaser hereby agrees that h, shall not be entitled to
question either the quantum of (;uc 1 amount nor claim any
interest thereon.

23) The Purchaser/s further undertake/s to pay any additional charges

if at all actually incurred by the Promoters In respect of
abovementioned heads in proportior t•, the area of the said flat.
In addition to above mentioned char 1es the Purchaser is also
liable to pay service tax, vat and/o · , 1y other taxes as may be
applicable or made applicable to the tr, nsaction arrived at by this
Agreement by and between the Purcha ;er and promoters and the
Promoters shall always be entitled to re :over from the Purchaser/s
such taxes and charged In propor: io, to the area of the said
premises.

24) Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to be nor shall be

construed as a grant, demise or assignment In law of the said

property or any part thereof. The Purchaser/s shall have no claim
save and except In respect of the said premises hereby agreed to
be sold to him/her/them and all open spaces, parking spaces,
lobbies, staircases, terraces, recreation spaces etc. will remain the
property of the Promoters until the said property and Building is
transferred to the Society/Limited Company or apex body as
hereinbefore mentioned.

25 ) The Purchaser/s doth hereby declare and covenant with the

Promoters that he/she/they shall not treated any obstruction or
objection for utilizing any additional floor space index and/or other
benefits in terms of FSI and/or TDR while developing the said
property and/or any time even after completion of the present
development scheme in respect of the said property and as such, the
Promoters, shall be entitled , to make use of all such
 131
additional/balanc e FSI and/or other benefits, exemptions, etc . in
respe
c t of the said property and by utilizing such
FSI/benefits/exemption shall be entitled to c arry on and
construct/erect any additional upper floors in addition to the
presently proposed upper floors and/or carry on the erection of
any other' struc ture, building/s In and over the said
property and/or to alienate and transfer/dispose off all the
premises, units,
flats, etc. that shall be situated In such additional
floors/structures to any person of their choice upon such terms
and c onditions and for suc h c onsideration as may be deem fit and
I

proper by the Promoters In their sole discretion.

26) The Purc haser/s doth hereby dec lare and assure the Promoters to

perform his/her/their part of this agreement in the agreed manner

and that he/she/they shall not c ommit any default and/or delay in
I

the performanc e thereof and in c ase of suc h delay shall be liable

to pay the reasonable compensation to the Promoters.

27) he/she/it/they has/have investigated the title of the Promoters in

and over the said property and has/have got

himself/herself/itself /themselves satisfied about the same and as
such has/have no grievances in respect thereof and/or In respect
of the rig ht of the Promoters of developing the said property. The
purchaser/s doth hereby undertake not to raise any grievances in
respect thereof any time hereafter.

28) The Purc haser/s doth hereby dec lare and admit that the Promoters

have made full and true disclosure of the nature of their title to
the said property and/or have disclosed all the information within
their knowledge and as required under section 3 of the said Act
and as such the purchaser/s has/have no grievances in respect
thereof of any nature and/or about the compliance of the
provisions of section 3 of the said Act by the Promoters.
 132
29) Unless and until all the amounts the Purchaser/s is/are liable to
pay to the Promoters by and under this agreement and/or
otherwise in law, are fully and completely paid, the Purchaser/s
shall not be entitled to transfer/agree to transfer his/her/its/their
interest in the said premises and/or the benefits of this agreement
to any one else. Even after full and final payment of all such
amounts, the Purchaser/s shall not be entitled to transfer/agree to
transfer/assign the said premises and/or his/her/its/their Interest
in the said premises and/or benefits of this agreement to any one
else unless the written consent of the Promoters Is obtained.
However, upon registration of the proposed society and the
conveyance of the said property in favour of such society, it shall
not be obligatory on the part of the Purchaser/s to obtain such
consent. While giving written consent the Promoters shall be
entitled to demand from the Purchaser/s by way of transfer
charges and administrative and other cost, charges and expenses,
such amounts as may be deem Just and proper by them in their
sole discretion. Notwithstanding anything contained hereinbefore,
the Purchaser shall not be entitled to transfer the said premises
and/or his interest in the said premises In breach of conditions
imposed under .the exemption order, Issued under 20 of the ULC
Act, which order Is mentioned herein before annexed to this
agreement as Annexure 'B'.

30) As soon as a minimum number of persons required to form a Co­

op. Society or association have taken the flpts under registered
agreements, the Promoters shall initiate steps for the formation of
I the proposed co-op. society and/or association, PROVIDED
ALWAYS, the charges for formation of such society as agreed In
the agreement are fully paid by such flat takers. The Promoter
may forrn different Societies in respect of different buildings to be
erected dn the said property or said total property. The apex
body/association of such different Societies shall be formed and
the conveyance of the said Properties shall be executed in favour
of such apex body/association subject to the said terms and
conditions of tt,e said ULC order under section 20 of the ULC Act,
and/or subject to terms and conditions of other relevant
provisions of law. However the Promoters sha11 have sole
 133
desecration to take any other or suitable decision with regard
to formation of the organisation of flat taker and/or regard
the Conveyance of the said property.

31) The purchaser specifically declare that it shall be the sole right

choice and authority of the promoter to make alterations

relocation etc. of the RG area access road, parking space etc. In
the said layout, at any time till completion of the development
project by consuming all available FSI/ TOR etc. of the said
property

. 32) The Promoters shall take all necessary steps to convey the said

property to the such co-op. housing society/association or apex

body which is to be formed in the abovementioned manner,
however, the Promoters sh�II not be liable to convey the said
property to such society/association or apex body unless and until
the development of the said property by utilizing full FSI thereof,
at present available and/or which shall be available in future is
utilized and consumed and/or the FSI that shall become available
by way of T.D.R. or due to amalgamation is utilized and
consumed; and all the flats, premises, to be situated in the said
building are sold and transferred and amouht due from such flat
Purchasers are fully and completely paid by them and/or each of
them, to the Promoters. Till then neither the Purchaser nor the
j Society/ Association of the Purchaser/Apex body etc. sha II be
entitled to make demand for the Conveyance in their favour from
the Promoter and/or the Owner/Confirming Party. While executing
such conveyance, the Purchaser/s shall be liable alongwith the
other flat takers of the said building for the payment of
his/her/its/their proportionate share In the stamp duty and
registration charges the shall be payable on such conveyance.

33) The Purchaser/s and/or the persons to whom the said premises
are transferred or to be transferred hereby agree to sign and
execute all papers, documents and to do all other things as the
 134
Promoters may require of him/her/it/them to do and execute from
time to time for effectively enforcing this agreement and/or for
safeguarding the interest of the Promoters and all persons
acquiring the remaining premises in the said building on the said
property.

34) T
h e Purch aser/s shall at no time demand partition of
his/her/its/their interest in the said building and/or the said
property, it being agreed and declared by the Purchaser/s that
his/her/its/their interest in the said premises is impartable.

35) Th e Promoters sh all be entitled to assign th eir righ ts in and over

the said property to any other person/s of their choice any time.
The Promoter sha 11 also be entitled to constitute or reconstitute
the Promoter Firm in their sole discretion.

36) Th e Promoters sh all In respect of any amount remaining unpaid by

the Purchaser/s under the terms and conditions of this agreement,

shall have a first lien and charge on the said premises, agreed to
be purchased by the Purchaser/s.

37) Any delay or indulgence by th e Promoters in enforcing th e terms

of this agreement or any forbearance of giving of time to the

Purchaser/s shall not be construed as a waiver on the part of the
Promoters nor shall the same in any manner prejudice the rights
of the Promoters.

38) Without prejudice, to the rights of the Promoters under the said
Act and/or any other Act, the Promoters shall be entitled to take
action against the Pup Purchaser/s if the purchaser do/does not pay
his/her/its their proportionate share of outgoing every month and if
remains in arrears months and/or do/does not purchaser price and/or
other amounts which he/she/it/they/ is/are liable to
 135
pay under tllis agreement diligentl-y, then the Promoters shal'I be
entitled to terminate this agreement and enter upon the
said premises and forfeit all the amounts paid by the
Purchaser/s under thi,s agreement and resume possession of the
said premises.

39) If any extra amenities (In addition to the amenities set out in

Annexure 'L') and/or additions and/or alterations are demanded or

req,uiired by the Pu:rchGJser/s to be carried out in the said premises
during the process of erection of the said building, then same shall
be provided/ done by the Promoters however, the Purc:haser /s shal I
be table to JD,ay an extra cost for the same, which extra cost shall
,be paid In adva11ce by the Purchaser/s before the work as required
sbove is carried out by the Promoters.

40) The Promoters shall be enbtled to sell, transfer and/or agreed to

sell/transfer alll the other premises, park:i1n9 areas, open spaces

etc. situated, or to be situated in the saii:d building and/or upon any
porti,on of the said property to anyone 'lse isn any mGJnner
whatsoever a11d such Purchasers shall be entitled to use their
respective prem'is@s/flats/units/parking spaces/open space etc. for
any purposes. as may be perm,issi1 ble under law and
the Purchaser/s sh:alill not take any objection of any nature In
that regard.

41) The Promoters sha II be entitled to arnalgamate the said property

wit,h the adjoining or neighbourhood properties and by such
amal9amation, shall be entitled to make use of additional FSI for
constructing additional floors on the said ' building and/Or any
other structures/builcHng,s In tne sai,d property and/or shall also be
entit, led to obtain and acquire T.D.R .. of any other properties for
constrnctrion o:f additional upper floors on the building, to be
constructed on the said property and for that purpose, further shall
be entit11ed to make required amendment and/or
modifications in the said approved plans and shalll fur approvGJI to
such amendment/modification/revision from the said' Corporation
 136
without seeking any separate approval/consent/permission
from the purchaser/s herein; and in fact, this clause itself shall
be as such permission/consent.

42) In case of acquisition or requisition of the said property and/or

any portion thereof, for at any reason whatsoever by the said
Corporation and any other competent authority, the Promoters
alone shall be entitled to appropriate the compensation receivable
or that shall be given against such acquisition or requisition.

43) Until the conveyance of the said property in the manner

mentioned hereinbefore, the Promoters shall be entitled at their
discretion to control the management and affairs of the said
building and the said property and/or to allot the right of
management to such person/s of their choice in such manner as
may be deem fit and proper by them.

44) The Purchaser/s shall immediately after the execution of this

agreement lodge this agreement for registration with the Sub
Registrar of Assurances at Thane by paying requisite stamp duty
thereon and after lodging the same shall within two days intimate
to the Promoters in writing together with the Sr. No., under which
the same is lodged so as to enable the Promoters to admit the
execution. If the Purchaser/s fail/s to lodge this agreement for
registration by paying requisite stamp duty thereon, the
Promoters shall not be In any way responsible for the non­
registration of the said agreement and the consequences arising
there from. The responsibility of paying the stamp duty and
registration charges and other incidental charges payable in
respect of this agreement shall be that of the Purchaser/s.

45) All notices, to be served on the Purchaser/s and contemplated by

this agreement shall be deemed to have been duly served if sent
 137
to the Purchaser/s, by Under Certificate of posting
at his/her/its/their address specified hereinbefore.

46) This Agreement shall always be subject to the provisions of the

Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act 1963 and the rules made
there under.

SCHEDULE I
TOTAL PROPERTY

All that piece and parcel of plots of land, totally admeasuring

35,610 square meters, lying being and situate at Village Chitalsar
Manpada, Taluka and District, Thane, within .the limits of Thane
Municipal Corporation and Registration District Thane bearing plot
nos.

Sr.No. Gut No. Hissa Past/Previous Area Sq. Ownership

No. Gut No. mtrs
1 59'A/2G/1 59/2 (Pt) 7200.00 D.
Dahyabhai
& Co. (TMC
for Road)
2 59A/2G{2 59/2 (pt) 5530.00 D.
Dahyabhai
& Co.
3 59A/2H 59/2 (Pt.) 3250.00 D.
Dahyabhai
& Co. (TMC
for Road)
4 59A/3B/1 59/3 (Pt.) 14800.00 D.
Dahyabhai
& Co. (TMC
for Road)

5 59A/3B/2 59/3 (Pt.) 1350.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& Co. (TMC
 138
for Road)

6 59A/3B/3 59/3 (Pt.) 120.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& Co.(TMC
for Road)

7 59A/3B/4 59/3 (Pt.) 500.00 D.

1 Dahyabhai
& Co.(TMC
for Road)

8 59A/3B/5 59/3 (Pt) 260.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& Co.(TMC
for Road)

9 59A/3B/6 59/3 (Pt.) 200.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& CO.(TMC
for Road)
10 59A/16B2/1/2/1 59/16 (Pt.) 700.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& Co.(TMC
for Road)

11 59A/16B2/1/2/2 59/16 (Pt.) 1200.00 D.

Dahyabhai
& Co.(TMC
for Road)

12 59A/16B2/1/2/3 59/16 (Pt.) 500.00 D.

Dahyabhai
&Co.
 139
SCHEDULE-II
SAID PROPERTY

All that piece and parcel of plot of land, bearing sub divided Cwt­

no.59A/3B/I (out of original Gut no.59/3 part) admeasuring 14800

square meters, Gut No.59A/3B/2 (out of original Gut no.59/3 part)

admeasuring 1350 square meters, Gut No.59 A/3B/3 (out of

original Gut no.59/3 part) admeasuring 120 square meters, Gut

No.59A/3B/4 (out of original Gut no.59/3 part) admeasuring 500

square meters, Gut No.59 A/3B/5 (out of original Gut no.59/3

part) admeasuring 260 square meters, Gut No.59 A/3B/6 (out of

original Gut no.59/3 part) admeasuring 200 square meters, gut

No.59 A/2G/l (out of original Gut no.59/2 part) admeasuring 7200

square meters, Gut No.59 A/16B2/1/2/2 (out of original Gut

no.59/16 part) admeasuring 1200 square meters thus totally

admeasuring 25630 square meters, out of the said total property

described in Schedule-I here above written, and which Is

described by red colour boundary line on Annexure- annexed

herewith, which is the true copy of the sanctioned plan sanctioned

under V.P.No.2005/160, and which property is bounded as under:

On or towards East

On or towards West ·,.

On or towards North
On or towards South
 140
°
SCHE oULE-111
SAID PREMISES
A flat premises bearing No.198 admeasuring 883 sq. feet of carpet area on the
19th floor Holly Hock of the proposed building, to be constructed in or upon the
property mentioned in Schedule II above.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF THE PARTIES HERETO HAVE HEREUNTO SET AND
SUBSCRIBED THEIR RESPECTIVE HANDS TO THESE PRESENTS ON THE
DAY AND YEAR FIRST HEREINABOVE WRITTEN.

SIGNED & DELIVERED BY THE

Withinnamed 'PROMOTERS'
MIS. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS
• Through its Partner
SHRI SURA! RAMESH PARMAR
In the presence of ..............................
1) sd/- Ranjit R. Sahi
2)
SIGNED & DELIVERED BY THE
With in named 'PURCHASERS: SD/­
MR. YASHWANT BALKRISHNA SHINDE
In the presence of , , ,
1) Sd/-
2)
SIGNED & DELIVERED BY THE
With in named 'CONFIRMING PARTY/OWNERS:
OF M/S. D. DAHYABHAI & COMPANY PVT. LTD.
Through its Directors
SHRI. SURAJ R. PARMAR For Cosmos construction
SD/- partner
In the presence of,, .., ..•.•,, , ....
•p• • · , .... ,

1) Sd/-
2)
RECEIPT
Received of and from the within named Purchaser, a sum of Rs.2,51,000/- (Rupees Two
Lacs Fifty One Thousand Only) by Cheque No.---- dated - - drawn on AS PER
STATEMENT ATTACHED being part/full payment payable by the Purchaser by to us.
(Subject to realization of Cheques.)

Rs.2,51,000/- WE SAY RECEIVED

For COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS

1.SD/- SD/- Partner
2.
//TRUE COPY//
 141
ANNEXURE A-3

....
�-��q��
(.:mf) 1W!i �
m��-
�;-q.mNTt 3Rcfi. ��-�WIT{
'U,�oV�o'o' "*',,'M;m,olut(�).
· "" MIT,t!RT WIT ffl
·zr:tl:;r:��!�.� crrrr iifefco,�.cit.-m,
-��. m.f-ir,'oTi'T

� � t!f� tif,F{; orot � �:;r -��,�� 't!T uif1-1.ftai1i.ict � W,t_O� -�

�doll������� 'l!Rf -qr.��-�-� qi�ctii!{v{ � z;r=m
� w.' ni,,l��l� � ��l�t�i � looo �;ift, � � ;q.�f � $. 'GW �
W c(•\@O<l(�qll\�I -��q �� (�) 't!Ttf � ql\Q5inm{ � �-
,,,,....__
:--�) ��-qr;�-�� -qj�qi�1ct � sl;.ir:cft.�A�od��I 'Ir.iii.
�o�/o�-�� � �l'o'lo� ci 'qt.��� .qj�cfi�!H � � sl;.�t_t.�� �oo�
K-��/0'9/0� w � � iii. E.o� zc •M�illi!M Mfm-1�1< olU! 'qRl Ni�cnilH -q;{
i!i.��-�/t-�/pu�/����o �.t�l�ol�o��. � �- 00 � �. �
:ai�t11{111m< � tr,\ft1HlflH a:tNRW �a��-.
.
� �-� � � � \f\(c{Ufti!1 �--� amft, �
� tt14-l&iH-�,� 'Q��� ,m;gfG'qftrrntzjm cfii;icli!Gl,�
l :.

tWl-i&,H "ai� zj-;ft�it<it�*M·�wmit .mt.

�- �- � "#n' � olUt ·�- � sli.Sl�/�oCt/�ov�
K,�o.�.��lt. �tfitcli1JT�i ����mm.� 3lITTlralfco
���t-rt�fu:�w.����/��ll ���. �ft"c�
�.� -41<llW-119 � �. �-lfco � -qr.••���.fu:�
ili,t.��o/��,l ��m-ff. +ff. ffi·Rlllt!WU���mcft��mlt.
,, � � � �im•Mi� � ��·mm. � � � s!i,3{�;�
/�ol�/�oV�lQifficis1 f<,%.�.��l� Q��lTTW!iffi ���ll,¥0 �.ift. ���filvWTI
 142
\:'

qtm tsarso ft,u/v/cq rtql qTd fimi.

qnt.
prqrqn +ffiR 6 -,. Jfk ,* 4

1, qqqTul yrolo qfr-t qtfi'sm cra fiieriil( qtwt rtrars

fa \lidl,qo q}.t, qSoT
#m'a fuffis rti. vq{ q,itt{Et 5a:crkne e rlffifrr *,e rrq$ qft{fuTq,qt
qfftHqqqii qTkrm,ffi7o7*,r/cq, ft,lo/v/ai orqq dooo
st,*, ,*x *siqrrmr
rrit lt arkqFsl tam-qrs torifr q{q ffi fr? qhmfio t.sTq-iq( wfu +. qt+
qlriqr sqt itd snwqq {fld'm dmq dsarqr i6wr-qr qi?rfi g+ii
s{ s-Fqrfi
qrfi',

Y. qi.$q{iIrr6T'{Te Yi{-g?
qtql qT'fi ffitqr sroerfid'3T(fftT .ooo d.qT, qftq s't6rr
risarqr tilrqr{l q'tdT t.siqtq( eTfrr fi. fi
Fflmq{ t'i srqfufi qt, ,nfr $qs,
ffi qffim1
ffi . a m.5eifl qtri'drlqd E*qs- I t e /q i/s.m.. \ o V 1 z i!fr, n
o o o

ft.v/v/1ooq i
iililId RrH qrirdt Rd ed'n'$q qr.sq qTqmqrt fc qrfEmr,
qd ft.tt/u/tool tlfr h,lq frilHr qrt.
q;,qqqq/1ooq
q. EITJ ffii
4ooo d.ql.tx t.ft srqrqT{ enfi q-+ EiF{ ftd fi qirTs qftrsr
di-dc'rfr 6|sq 1ffi
a t* fun'e tra EEr+ ft q'r"gra on*.

qnTffi qt+ iltd dd'EgtxqTqtftu mrin urdra qqnil qTt.

:a5
mq

*
1i q6mefllffiri (o:yo frq.tfiRffilrfi l\\cc.xo q-d-dcr ehTqrqilHffETHq
qrt. q'qT dffiT Hrq+il'A 5.1 ffi ild',Tflq?mfr+ sgq frtg {fi x'qT'{

srqnrqr tfi WCfr stqeT

3il1d. 4.4oooq1,*, qtxrqT ffiri fu.frfrdtllr qfliqlT$
sq{t frisaqnad qri'.

1, qr.q'ililer6{fi;qtqftqis
qiffid lt.ta/t/eq t fruffil fi.dqr nqrr,ttt tqIEI
qifq{ 6T{fi qa mi qqrn .lfii ql ffFrff-q ffiI ftasr $asmflIf iqit Hd fi
eft, nrnqt $+qd m.t qir qloil
sdiqr qftHlqd sts{firfi qpi *'nlm nqpmR fi
nrqrf, r{-{ iqHT rqtql s'fr ifr Hl.tfs kl-t qr& ?qIqIEd 6qmtn dlrn1fi ,n'gq' ofi .

t. qT.I@d1i, q6RIe. n;q fi ft'Y/v/looq t+i qlilT Cq qt'3tq ;nqrmq fqt

qi}5sh fte fr*,i{ t.qqqVlooq qrfr'o qTm Tfu 3T{ trrsT E {d( Tmrfrlq
A
ilTT'* {HiqR]fi,l qii HIqrfu fi'frqrqr s}'ri'(i qTtxl
stfrml.qt+ dtrfiT oTrt',
qmlqrd qit rqs s qfimRK cfli tifi '
. qftil fida d' iq5* t
rmffii mi qt* aH *e Wtffa' qda qTiln{ rqd 3TIt:

t. qli ftrnnfi qHqM h,aTrl tt

rylilqr irqrndi qd ffiiFIn fra-+fi qq, ttf-
Ri-i,Id \. t E o qq qtTntq n6. qr faflIai
Wt ffiq,( Et'+r dqffi aitrd wqT
eiqiq6iliTIi
t. t1r, t'm.qol ar<t ql,ftrfi€.
q6S1 ffip51u1' *'t,o71a
fififr tr* 1'ffi
ft'ffi fr,q1m rqT'Trdt fi
rti ffiitlffifi srd srTt.
r, q'fi.fuaqfr qrqfrqr+ frd qmqF'tqflfl t{sn q
d't nma qd rtq IHIfftqrfi
um q qhfdors rtcd TiEt
'Itfi'qhr
fi
fq,VrAr ftiH q,,{,rts'n ksR m.qoi Tfi
mnqr ord kffd ag+ mr+{ E-qfi m'o+qfr{ ElsHI frtA sr$ lrrtd qt
qrto 4oo o al.*. e t.[E slqlrrrg fr s dr+
,''l. ql,rFq;qmfi"qarn.ge+(fl, fe{urqq qrd qmrmfi nm afi silftI
q6rfls.vrffiqrfr frdr qli''t
q, r'fi qflm +-d u/tt (qt/tqh q \Vlq ,h) ei sf,r-qTi qT& Ero q 6cdr Ehilqt rqT

'ffii fi
rryi ftaqi.#i qlffia ;{qrsqFqr qli{lrdt xcud fr h+fi.

$nlm qE@i \tE{n frfl qErntqr qnftEn_t{IElroT iilr,q+{q

Fi'ft qTfrdq liinT gdit Flld.amRrft
ftfrrmifiotTt'
qlifqf,as{qFiqrcT iqlm urdin t stqrrtit mfu sq'fr qit Td,t,(o,ouq d
ql qfur1 tfi m qfta1m 6qm qlT'ft r{frq rmr srrqgrtrn qftrfrfi t* cc,iut

2
 143

ls?
!t. ql, qlini ilar sisq Iftirqlq E qiT fr-fl{ rr6r{sam hlta silET
&, *<t d,
.ei. qq/t t+if, qr/t qtfro toqio q1.fr, q'Tit, trlrt
qosqi.oo q}. fr,, rct.
qqqh cdlut qtql, qir erdqflot cct\et q1+ qliiqnrflflqqtstq/ov/t1ca tlff
tuqta o{iaT *cr. q p
qBle utai nrm qlnr6'm, frmAoac/tuqu/t ktq
\clocl\\ccg'R (o:yo qffi sTflfl'qrtrf,td s6'il 4d,1u1.g1, t. fiqtt$i
t\\/c,yo q1.*. eli[dq,f,srgq,{n'qtuqtil qrd oilt. mrqiqk+'{sR"fiqifr \erc
ftnto ot/o t/l i. \ Tsn' tiuqta ffi-d qTi.
fi
t sq'rflt ofrfu S,rfi qfi#{r fli.$qi ffirtldt qri T-+ 4oooo qt. *
W Edqfta.rAi fuqil 6(fe,lin otrfr Eldr. Hrqqtr q'r, {6mq qrqfr ;{qtfi{flq
iei *ffi *ini fifiu i. q qi\e Arer qrfto ftntq tcloilqqtt, t-dET
oiltlT H".

iTRvrr{HR (ooo,oo q\. * & Ta qnm dt rs T6r-q qri Edqtffi'.rTht qk

Eruqia' und qq{tn+,.iq +$'R
mqio qoi ffi
1alrallqql TflR t},qif, qTd
fr qlqr {qr qds qH id' rj-{ t' qVtB/ q#d ftffir ffiqtfi t t e t s qtrts
$NF wl{E 6
qlst HSn rc i. qt/tq/1s qftr 1oo!o q)* $er W
oto qi.* qix$ifurqiiltfir'E{ (ooo,ooqt, qi qE?{aqrf,stfr'cTqpTri 01w
A

h qitq et{rq*f m*mroi nqsnn stie:

,t\ r+ruii Tare =t, qi/o/t t q.oi c ffi mqtm 0{, 6 m, E, t E qqdqtffi
u q'sfrlqi-d aTd srd'. iqqqr'( (t) ,E i. qr/oT/VsT
ErdqiT flitt( Erqrtilt qr'f,}, (i) ft
i, qVoT/t/E'qERrq r\-qlq qtg, (t)
're
t qVs/ih'ftfr]-aq rfu{ qts q trdT r,
(x) m t. qVo/ltr GItfi Eiui ErtTiT'rT qrhq (q) Trz i; qq/oT/i/q GrAqR qhr rqr
(q) rz t. qq/q/t&'gl+'fi dqr rrqpnrit (r,) qqrqd dlw
'rrdt ry t. qq/oT/t/q fr
rirfi m. fr. (a) re t. qVe/i/r ortqr g[d(n fq srqFrTt r["s dq+ m. fu, qtt qH
qred H'd uri mC ii< slw{ mqi6 uyi t${ tutt-d qr-fr silt,

rA R smqd fr
fiq-fr sr. H. qitlTe t. qVqh/rr t gqoi i fud \s-d qta.
iqqq'R fq/s/Vq/t q qVsTh/Tr/r Bit qlq ftd sTdfi, rTe i'. qV€/t& qrnrq
dld-q t* i
eooo q *, qlr qraftir] *._W Brqr rrt 4ooo S ,4 & R sTqurt
qw ffiur. fla. fi,Eerq't sqr sd sne'{qs' qr6, trs{ufr hrsn m-qiq qot fr qK

_ qr. qtl.fly q6W nihfi{-slq

St fi
erhrisii tqin qrd slvnr+ i{ n
* g$di srqqft rfiv qqq( rrfr, ilrT& rfi{rfr Fi$ti q'Ewiei qrqrq's'flr rq{ qffi
C! y"qrr
8101 m,,iltq' qrt TrqE, qi qr*1q qratiii Bqlqqrfrq srfrffirfr

ql*rs,'mqr qTqT mra rer'grt mrq orRT

arl ft'qn/ pid TIHT
Hfier k qrt,

wfu-
'.
'i\
t

q. yaffi6-aq=lewztnzro wi,
i. t fr uuqpg sius q.{ri fi
re-+iqr qtarqw 3ooiio !t. qt, qiT Hfr
Eru'qtf,' tg,{ Ttt qlinr Biq'm qe ;i, qVt oT/E qT qh{
/t,qis qrqT
i.gqtdmnotiiltnfr,
v. i{rhT H-d $.tRrf,irT s6qm.

coPl Ar#rr1
TRUB.gOW
ot@,|?Illlyhe jro"-gleh,
'- .
44 ds (qrq'Eqrdm)
f,ead onl- E-z'ta.hrra4urge trcr
l o Delivlred(l6f22gpaprrFcc -- i sqfrrrTrilq qftrsd
Rr6 oni- f:.21n_V. p.
- Ctarge. _
ucd by s_--tot,t_9&___ ETotfq.,11.,T,6tdf.

o +
u1
Sub.
-IuYlaati\r.-
D;ihi[nal0lffoer
L.
 144
IN THE COURT OF SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICE THANE
DIVISION, THANE
RTS Revision Appeal - 191/2011

Government of Maharashtra

Versus

1. Konkan Housing and Area Development Corporation

(MHADA), Bandra Division through Chief Officer

2. M/s. Dayabhai & Co. Through Mr. Suraj Parmar R/at-

201/204, Agyari Lane, Tembhi Naka, Thane (W)

3. Mr. Soma Rama Gawande

R/at- S. No. 59/2, Near Mulla Baug,
S. V. Road,GhodbunderRoad,
.... Opponents

Tai. Dist. Thane

As per Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Act, 1966

Judgment: Details of suit property

Village name S.No./ H. No. Area Mutation Entry No.

H.R.P. and Date
 145

Mauje Chitalsar 59/2P 0-80-0 Mutation Entry No.

Manpada, Tai. Dist. · 602 date 28/8/92
Thane

The facts of the case:

According to the order in Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal Tenancy Appeal No.137 /1989

dated 22/2/91 and Mutation Entry No. 602 in respect of land bearing survey no.59/2P at

Mauje Chitalsar Manpada, Thane, area of 8000 sq. mtr. has been excluded from area of

Konkan Housing and Development Corporation (MHADA) instead of area of Mis. Dayabhai

and Co. and allotted to Shri. Soma Rama Gawande/

In the present case, Tahsildar, Thane has submitted the report vide his letter No.

Revenue/Room-1/T-3/R.R. /KAVl/15230 dated 12/10/2011 regarding cancellation of

Mutation Entry No. 602 in pursuant to the Order No. TPS-1208/53/C.No.501/08/NAVl-12

dated 4/4/09 of the Hon. Chief Minister Maharashtra State and Order dated 21/07/09 in

the writ petition No.5665/2009 passsed by the Hon. High Court of Bombay.

Both the parties were givem an opportunity of hearing in respect of the above claims

from time to time. Counsel Shri. Pradip Pillai was appeared on behalf of the Opponent

no.2 in the proceedings.

The details in the written statement of the opponent no.1 are as follows.

1) The property in dispute was received by the Konkan Housing and Area Development

Board vide order No. AOF/1086/301/ DXV dated 10/02/1986 of the Additional Collector

Thane. Writ Petition No.1927/1988 was filed by the original owners in the Hon. High

Court, Bombay against the said order. The said writ petition has been dismissed by the

Hon. High Court. Therefom, the original owner had filed Spl. Writ Petition No.6550/1988

in the Hon. Supreme Court. The Hon. Supreme Court had given stay order in this

regard.
 146

2) The original land owner had filed appeal in the government. According to Order No. ACF

1086/301/DXV dated 27/1/1989 passied by Government, MHADA returned to the original

owner the land admeasuring 35588.40 sq.mtr. from Konkan Board on 7/4/89. It has been
recorded vide Mutation Entry No. 718.

3) Thus, after returning 40% of the land to the original owner, Konkan Board had total area of

53382.60 sq. mtr. Out of the said land, an area of 8000 square meters has been received
by Soma Rama Gawde, a tribal farmer, under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land
Act vide Order No. TNC/A/138/86, dated 20/4/89 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue
Tribunal. The said area was erroneously deducted from the area of the Konkan Board's
share when it should have been deducted from the area of the landlord M/s. Dayabhai and
Co.

4) In the report submitted to the Hon. Chief Minister of Maharashtra Government, the Authority

had expressed the position that the above 8000 sq. mtr. of land should be given from the
share of Mis. Dayabhai and Co. instead of from the share of Konkan Board. And the Hon.
Chief Minister has approved it as per his order no. TPS-1208/53/C.No.501/2008/UD-12
dated 4/4/2009. Also, the Hon. High Court has given a decision in Writ Petition
No.5665/2009 on 21/7/2009.

5) Therefore, the above 8000 sq. mtr. area should be reduced from the area of M/s. D.

Dayabhai and that area should be recorded in the rights of Konkan Housing and Area
Development Board MHADA.

The summary of opponent no.2 in his written statement is as follows.

 147

1) According to the 60:40 scheme by the Government of Maharashtra, the company has

acquimd the actual possession of an area of 35588.40. Opponent No. 2 has

constructed buildings on the said area after taking permission from Thane Municipal

Corporation and other competent authoritie1s. And since there is D.P. Reservation of

MHADA on the area of 8000 sq. mtr. the said area is excluded.

2) According to the decision of the Hon. Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal dated 28/2/89,

Shri. Soma Rama Gawande cultivated the suit lands and occupied by him, for this

reason, the suit property has been record in their name by Tenancy Act. However, there

is no provision in law that any part of the land received by opponent no.2 was not in the

possession of Shri. Soma Rama Gawande and was never cultivated by him.

3) The order dated 4/4/2009 of the Hon. Chief Minister, State of Maharashtra as well as
the order in Writ Petition No. 5665/2009 of the Hon. High Court, Bombay has been

misinterpreted by MHADA and other government officials. Therefore, no order should

be passed regarding the land in possession of opponent no.2, which will affect the

entitlement and rights of the opponent.

The summary of opponent no.3 in his written statement is as follows.

1) Shri. Soma Rama Gawande had the ancestral property at Mauje Chitalsar Manpada and
has lived there for the last 50 to 60 years. He has built a compound on the entire property

at this place and is occupying it.

2) According to the decision. of Hon. Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Tenancy No.

137/189 and Mutation Entry No. 602, the suit property is recorded in thB name of Shri.

Soma Rama Gawande.

 148

3) Since the said land has been given by the court, the above Mutation Entry cannot
be cancelled and also according to the letter dated 3/9/11 of the Principal Konkan
Housing and Regional Development Board, Mumbai, it is not written that the
Mutation Entry no.602 should be cancelled, it has been written that the land should be
given to Mhada by changing it.

4) Hon. High Court and Hon. Chief Minister, Government of Maharashtra has been
given order that, the above 8000 sq.mtr. was to be excluded from the share of Mis.
D. Dayabhai and Company.

5) However, it is requested that the entire land area of Shri. Soma Rama Gawande
should remain as per the order of the court without making any changes in both the
above 7/12 extracts (59/2A/E and 59/2A/F).

After hearing the arguments of both the parties regarding the above suit
property, the matter was closed on merits. Looking at the record in the
present case, the following facts are pointed out.

Land admeasuring 3,10,079 sq. mtr. at Mauje Chitalsar Manpada was in the name
of account holder M/s. Dayabhai and Company. An additional area of 88,971 sq.mtr. of
the said land was given to the Konkan Housing and Area Development Corporation
under the Urban Land Acquisition Act. The possession of area adm. 50761.00 sq.mtr. in
Gut No. 59/2P, 20110 sq.mtr. in Gut No. 59/3 and 88971 sq.mtr. in Gut No. 59/96 i.e. of
the total area of 88971 sq.mtr. was given on 19/04/1988. The land adm. 35588.40 sq.mtr.
out of 88,971 sq.mtr. of land was given to original owner under 60:40 scheme as per
Government Circular No.APL 1088/2797/3 dated 28/08/1988 . It has been r�corded vide
Mutation Entry No. 718 dated 03/02/2005.
 149

The price of Soma Rama Gawande's 8000 sq.mtr. out of land owned by M/s.
Dayabhai and Company was fixed. In this regard, order has been passed in Order
dated 28/02/1991 in Tenancy Appeal No. A137/1989 passed by Hon. Maharashtra
Revenue Tribunal, Bombay, THAT area adm. 8000.00 sq.mtr. from the area of original
owner is to be transferred in the name of the tenant and the same is recorded as per
Mutation Entry No. 602 dated 28/08/1992. But the said area is shown on the name of Shri.
Soma Rama Gawande in Gut No. 59/2A, Hissa No. 2E and 2F respectively, and th13
area of Group No. 59/2A/2B from Maharashtra Housing Board has been shown as
38030 sq.mtr. instead of 30030 sq.mtr. area and the said 8000.00 sq.mtr. area is reduced
from the area of the original owner Mis. The Dayabhai and Co.

In the case, total of 8 parts of original Gut No. 59/A/2 have been sub-divided into
No. A, B, C, D, I: and F. Accordingly (1) Gut no. 59/A/2/A account holder Shri. Harendra
Dayabhai Jani, (2) Gut no. 59/A/2/B Maharashtra Housing Board, (3) Gut no.
59/A/2/C Nilaben Praveenchandra Parekh and 2 others, (4) Gut no. 59/A/2/D account
holder Thane Municipal Corporation (5) Gut no. 591/A/2/E account holder Soma Rama
Gawande (6) Gut no. 592/A/2/F account holder Soma Rama Gawande (7) Gut no. 59/A/2/G
The Dayabhai and Company Pvt. Ltd. (8) Gut no. 59/A/2/H account holder The Dayabhai
& Company has been entered. It has been recorded as per Mutation Entry No.743.

There are total two parts of Gut No.59/A/2/G of D. Dayabhai and Company.
Accordingly, there are two parts i.e. 59/A/2/G/1 and 59/A/2/G/2. Gut No.59/A/2/B
8000 sq.mtr. Area 8000 sq.mtr. of Maharashtra Housing Board neieds to be
increased and the said area needs to be reduced from the area of D. Dayabhai and
Company Pvt. Ltd. In the case, the Mutation Entry No. 602 was recorded as per the order
of Hon. Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Bombay, so there is no question of cancellation of
the Mutation Entry. Therefore, there is no need to cancel the Mutation Entry in the case,
and it is required to rectify the area.
 150

Therefore, I. Madhav Patil, Sub Divisional Officer Thane Division, Thane in exercise of the
authority vested in me, hereby order as follows.

ORDER-

1) The revision is allowed.

2) By reducing the area of 8000.00 square meters from the area owned by M/s. D.
Dayabhai and Company, the implementation of the said area in Gut no. 59/2A/2B.
3) No order as to costs.
4) The order should be communicated to all concerned.

(Madhav Patil)
Date:- 12/04/2012
Sub Divisional Officer,
Place :- Thane
Thane Division, Thane
 ANNEXURE A-4 151
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI

CONSUMER CASE NO. 3505 OF 2017

WITH
IA/19013/2017(Permission to File Joint Complaint)
1. APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & 5 ORS. ...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS & ANR. ...........Opp.Party(s)
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. DR. B.C. GUPTA,PRESIDING MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. DR. S.M. KANTIKAR,MEMBER

For the Complainant : Ms. Pranali Sawant, Advocate

Mr. Prachiti R. Deshpande, Advocate
For the Opp.Party :

Dated : 13 Dec 2017

ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the complainants.

Admit.

Issue notice of the admitted complaint to the opposite parties, asking them to file their written version
within the time prescribed under section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Issue notice to the opposite parties on the application under section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer
Protection Act as well.

List the matter for further hearing on 05.03.2018.

......................
DR. B.C. GUPTA
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................
DR. S.M. KANTIKAR
MEMBER
. ANNEXURE A-5 152
BEFORE THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 3505 OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF

MRS. APARNA DEEPAK PANDE AND OTHERS COMPLAINANTS

VERSUS

M/S COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS AND ANOTHER OPPONENTS

G •,·M)� � �-.,-, �,
Cu11sumtr Oi :.,., •. ,:, ,.;:.•· · ·'

,... -j 2 9 OCT 20�3

' (

.... <
·· z cm��-·-
.• ,I
AMENDED COMPLAI - � fu-c+.·,, N ' . -

INDEX

SR.NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO

1. AMENDED COMPLAINT ALONGWITH 1- ;_c;

AFFIDAVIT.

PRANALI SAWANT
ADVOCATE FOR COMPLAINANT
 153
�EFORE TME MON'BLE
-
NATIONAL
-
CONSUMER
- -
DISPUTE$
-
REDRESSAL
COMMISSION
�� AT N',----EW DELHI
-

ORIG l'NAl J U_RIS_DICTION

CONSUM,ER COMPLAlNT NO. /2017

ll'J' THE MATTER OF:

1. Mrs. Apa:rna Deepak Pande

Age: 46 years, Occu: Home.maker
R/o: 17b, Holl' yhock CH'S lt:' d, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada,, Thane ·w·est., 400610

2. Mr. Vashaw.ant 1Balakrishna Shinde

Age: 46 years Occu: servic,e
R/o: 171:l, HoUyhoek CHS ltoll, Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West, 400610

3. M,. Kisher Shamrao Kumbha·re

Age,: S2years, Occu: Service
'R/0 lflat no. l9A, 'Winter Warden CHS Ltd,.
1:

Cosmos lounge,,
Manpada, Thane West, 400610

4, Mr. 8alasaheb Anandrao Babar

Age: 49 yea,rs, Occu: Service
R/o: la, w,inte,r Warden CHS Ltd,
Cosmos Lounge1
Manpa, da, Thane West, 400610

s. M.r. 'Prodip,ta Banerjee

Ase: 46 years, Otcu: Service
,R/o: 6D, Angeilicai Cl-:tS ltd,
Cosmos Lounge, ,
 154
Manpacla, Tna,ne West, 400610

6. Mr. Amar Appasaheb Chakote

Age: 41 years, Occu: Service
r/o: 18b, Angelica CHS l'td,
Cosmos Lounge,
Manpada, Thane West, 400610 ... Complainants,

VERSUS

• " .• I

l. M/S. cosmos constructions

Through it's director
. Mr.Manish Mehta,
Age: Major, Occu: Buiseness
At� Cosmos Construction
Cosmos hoµse, behind TMC office,
Sant Onyaneshwar roijd',
Panchpakhad�Thane(w)

2. M/S. Dahyabhai & Co. Pvt ltd.

through its authorized signatory
121, Mittal Towers, C'-wing,
1t h floor, Nariman point
Mumbai 400 021 .............. Opponents

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 21 0� THE CONSUMER

·PR(?TECTION ACT, 1986:

MOST' RESPECTIFULLY SHEWETH :

1. The Complainants above named aire the respective flat bu-yers in

th� project of tihe Opponents ,eg,lled "COStvlOS LOUNGE". Said
 155
projt;ct has, been constructed on the Qlot cif ;land beari1ng suit>
divided Cwt- no. 59A/3B/I more precisely described i,n Schedule
II to the Agreement for Sale admeasuring about 25630 square
rneters, Thane (W.) Opponents hav� formed 4! separate societies
in respect of the said 4 towers . Names of thos� 4 sociebes are
as unde,r: l) Hollyhock Co-operative Housing Society bearing
registration no. TNA/(TNA)/HSG/(TC)/25177/2013 which
contai, ns 77 flats Z) Winter Garden Co-operativ, e Housing Society
ttd. beaTing registration no. TNA/(TNA)/HSG/(TC)/26475/2014
contains 108 flats 3} Angelica Co�operative Ho1,1:sing Society lt�.
bearing registration no. liNA/(TNA)/HSG/, tTC)i/22461/2010
contains 77 flats 4) Orchid Co�operative Housing Society bearing
registration no. rNA/(lNA)/HSG/(TC)/22462/2010 c:ontains 82
flats. All these 4 societies are part of a common projlect i.e
COSMOS Longue and share a common l'and as pre�cribed i, fi1 the
schedule to the r€spective flat purchaser's agreement. All these
4 buildings comprise' of nuin1ber of flats and ar� sold to individual
flat purcha�ers who are identifried and/or unidentified flat
buyer!i. Compl' ainants aqove nam�d have filed present complaint
for themselves as well as on behali f of and for the benefit of all
flat buyers of the project called COSMOS tOUNGiE. Compl ai1nants 1

state and submit that since four societies �re formed by the
Opposite parties and since there i,s provisi,on in the, agreemen�
for a common conveyance and since no Apex body is formed by
the Opponents and since the rreliefa claime� are common,
prese�, t complaint is fil'ed by the complainants for themselves
and for the benefit and on behalf of all, the flat purchasers iff)1 the
said projec;t."
1

' .
2. The opponent no. 1 is a company whic· h is represented through its
Director as named in the cause title of this comp11 �iint. The opponent
no. 2 is the owner of the land and has signed the agreeme1r1t to sale
as. a confirming party. Tine Opponents have developed ai residential
comple)( named Cosmos lovnge on $t,Jrvey 11\11 umbers which are
 156
described in detail in the schedules annexed to th€ A_greement to
Sale. The Opponents. have constructed 4 buildings/Towers. Tine
Opponents h�we entered into Agreement to Sale at different timE!s
with various flat purchase.rs right from th� year 2009.

True copy of the Agree.ment to Sale dated ,04/01/20·13 perta,ining

to .complai· nant no. 2 is ,enclosed herewith as Annexure P- l (Page

I I , I

True eopy of the list of aH the fla,t purchas-ers atong with their iil'at
numbers is encfesed herewit, h as. Anne.Xure P- 2 (Page, no .........
to ....... )

3. Trie Complainants submit that the Opponents had drculated

brochures and had made huge publicity throughout city by means of
advertisements promising to provide Iarge number of amenities and
other facilities to the residents of this upcoming Res.identiial ,comQI€*
viz. Cosmos Longue. The OppGnent's representahv� m�H:le all the flat
purchasers believe that this was the. best project for r·esidential
purpose and on the basis of these assurances and promises and
a•dvertiseme!nts al'I the flat purchasers decided to purchase the flats
in Cosmos Longue. It is most respectful'.ly submi,tt.ed that the
consi.deration was fixed Gn the basis of th� amenitie,s and fa.cilities to
be provided.

True copy of the Srochvre is enclQsed herewith as .Annexurre P-3

(Page No. to

4. The Complainants further submit that after taking the possession

of the flats they real'ized that the quality of the construction is not as
assured by tile Opponent. Apart from this number ,of ameniti·es
which were, promised were either not provided at al.I or provided
with inferior quality. There are serious lapses on the parrt of the
Opponents resulting in threat to life, health and safety of tne
residents of Cosmos Longue. The Connplainants have contacted the
Opponents 011 number of occasions to get their disputes redressed.
The Complainants have personally met opponirnts on number of
 157
occasion� to discuss an(] settle the i1 ssues concerning their complex.
The Opponents and their represerntatives have however given only
holfow as5,urances without honoring any. Thus, in spite of a,11 the
efforts on belnalf of the flat purchasers to arnieably settle the issues,
the Opponents have miserably failed in respori1ding positively to the
1 1

flat purchaser's efforts. The Opponents, with an u'i,teriqr motive have

not abided by the terms and cbnditi,ons mentio
, ned in
Commencement Certificate ,and Agreement to Sal ,e. The Opponents
have not provided all the amenities and services dep.icted in
advert1, sernent brnchures issued by them and agreed' upon as !:)er
relevant dauses in Agreement to Sale. Tnis act of Opponents is
against ,provisions of law and detrimental to the flat, purchaser's
interest. The flat purchasers in the past had approached different
government :local authorities to get their gri:evances redressecl.
Unfo,t,unately, none of the efforts yieldeg any fruitful resul:t. lhe flat
purchasers, tMerefqre, have approached the Hon'bl,e National
Commi,5sion with a great hope of justice, Common gri,evances of all
the flat purchasers are enlistei;l herein this complaint application for
the kind consideration of thi, s Hon'ble Commission.

GROUNDS OF COMPLAINT

I._ O_ccupancy Ce'rtificate :_

1 t, ion of flats since

1. The Complainants submit that in spite of oc,cupa
2010. the Opponents have not b,een able to procun� the, occupancy
certificate. The Complainants h9ve followec;J up this matter
personatly as well as through letters with 0ppqnents on numerous
occasiions. The Opponents have promised to do the needful1 and give
occupancy certificate on every such occasion but hQv� failed to do, so.
-In fact, th� earl'i, er author,ized signatory of opponent no. 1, Late Mr.
Su raj Ramesh Parmar had gi,ven fl(i}tariz, ed declaration cum
undertaking that the issue, in respect to the occupa·ncy c�rtificate
1

th
l be. resolved soon. The s9,id undertaking is dated 11 January
would 1
 158
4013. However; till c:late the Complainants have not received th�
occupancy certificates for their respective b1,1ilc:lings. · After the sac:I
qemise of Mr. Parm.ir, the company has been taken over by Mr.
Maoi�l:i-
. M�hta
. as its Director. Mr. Mehta to9 has assureq on 'many
occasiqns that occupancy certificate would be procured. However, till
· c:late the occupancy certificcJte has not been provided to the
· Complainants.

Thus, fcJilure on part of the Opp9nents to honor this legal obligation

I

to s1,1pply the occupancy certificate is a grave deficiency in service on

the part of the Opponents. Hence, it is praye<;l that the Opponents be
directed to furnish the occupancy certificate -forthwith, for all three
buildings: It is prayed that an appropriate order fbr compensation as
mentioned in prayer clause be P<1ssed against the Qpponents for
delayed supply 9f Qccupan':y certificate.

Tr1,1e copy of undertaking r,li:ited 11/01/2013 given by Late Mr.

Suraj Parmar is enclosed herewith as Annexure P-4 (Page No. to )

True copy of IE!ttE!r dated 1�/07/2013 sent by complainant to

oppc;ment is enclosed her,with as Annexure P- 5 (Pclge No. to
)

True copy of letter dc1ted 09/03/2015 sent by cQmplainant to the

Commissioner Than, Municipal Corporation is enclosed herewith as
Annexure p. 6 (P�ge No. to ) · · I

True copy of letter dated 20/04/2015 sent by complainant to the

town development and planning officer of Thane Municipal
Corporation is enclosed herewith as Annexure P-7 (Page No. to
).

Tr1,1e copy of letter dated 20/04/2016 sent by opponent tc;> the

complainant is enclosed herewith as Annexure P- � (Page No. to
)
 159
True copy of letter dated 20/10/2016 sent by complainant to
01pponent is enclosed hetewith as Annexur,e P-9 (Pag,e No._ to

True copy of the assuirance dateQ1 ,28/01/2017 g,ivern, by M·r. Manisn

Mehta, Director of Opponent no. 1 is enclos�d herewith as
Annexure P-· 10 (Page No 1• to

IJ,-'-- CONVEVANCE:

1. The Compllairiants submit that the Opponents nav� formed

Hollyhock society on 14/05/2013, Winter garden society on
26/06/2014 and Angelica sooiety on 23/06/2013. How�ver in spite of
specific legal mandate of Sec. 11 of MOFA the Opponents ha,ve failed
to execute conv,eyance in fravour of the society. The Complainant�
1

most respectfoll' y submit that the Opponents want to av· ail the FSI
that could be available at some time in future and hence is delaying
the ex:ecution of conveyanrn on purpose. The Opponents al'so want
to expfoi.t. the open land of the project for their own benefit and
hence they are not executing, the conveyance deed in favor of
society.

· 2. lhe compl,ainants therefor,e pray that the Opponent be directed

to execute the conveyance as per the sanctioned layout plan.
Further the Cornp1lainants pray tha,t the Opponents be directed to
pay Rs. soot� per day to each Compl ainant from the date ofr
1

formati1on Qf sooiety tiU actu· alily conveyance is executed as a

compensation for failure in duty tq honor tlrle legal obligations 'like
procuring occupan�y certi1ficate and �xetution of conveyance . The
Complainants are entitl'ed to claim this compensation as they have
tri,eQ their level best to amicabJy settle the i, s.sue and ha1ve waiited
patiently for so many years. Delay to such a gn�at extent on the part
of the opponents to Qrocure occ,upancy certificate and e�ecut<;
conveyance in fa,vor of society i·s a serious llapse and hence neer::Js to
 160
be dealt wlth a stern hand. The complainants are therefore entitled
for the C0!irlpensation as claimed by them ..

Ill. AMENITIES
·� PROMISED BUT ,NOT 1PRO.\l,IIDED:
�-�

1. Tine Opponents had promised the toHowing amenities m the

brochure as well Agreement ta sale. But they have failed to provide
the s�me.
A. Exquisite club house equipped wi,th l· atest gym equi,prnents,
swimming pool,' squash court, poo'I tables and tennis court/tabl'e.
B. Amphitheatre.

2. The Complainants, submit that in spi,t e of repeated follow up and

1 1

rrgquests, the Opponents hav,e not provided the dub house as

promised in clause 9 of Anne�ure N of Agreement to Sale. The
Opponents have charged R�. 20,000/- from each of the fl'at
purchaser as a membership fee fQr the use of dub hou�e without
canstruct!ng tile same. The Opponents had ern,Jrnerated numb�r of
amernities in their brochure ,on1ly with an intention to induce the
Ccmpla1 inants to purchase the flats in th� said project at premium
rate. However, after receiving the entjre c;:onside ation from th� flat
purchasers, the Oppone11ts. have willfully negle,ter;;l to provide the
above mentioned faci,litit;s as, mentioned in brochure and Agreement
to Sale. This act of Opponents amounts to deficiency in service aind
also amounts to unfair trad� practice.

3. It is therefore prayed that Opponents be directed to provide aH

of the above mentioned amenities as rnentiQned in brochure and
Agreement tc Sale. The Opponents be further directed to pay
interest @18% on this amount of Rs. 20,000/-

IV. AMENITIES 1PRQVDED WITHii!..-SUB-STANDARD

-- •- QUALITY:

1. The amenities provided by the opponents of the sub standard

quallity are as follows:
 161
A. SWIMMING
"'
POOL:
..

The Opponents have constructed a swimming pool consisting of

temporary infrastructure. The said swimming pool doesn't have
permanent wash rooms and the surrounding area of the swimming
pool does not have a proper embankment. The complainants s1,1bmit
that tiles inside and around the swimming pool were not fitted
properly and were dislodged within a few days/months. The p1,1mps
used for the swimming pool were also of sub standard quaHty. Thus
the complainants were required to replace these pumps as well. The
complainants submit that they were reqµired to spend Rs. 2 Lacs for
overall corrections done on swimming pool to maintain it. Th1,1s!
apart from providing the swimming pool with permanent structure
and other necessary paraphernalia the complainants pray that the
opponents be directei;:l to refund Rs. 2 Lacs along with interest
@1�% to'the complainants.

True CQ!Jies of the photo�rc1phs of swimmin� pool are enclos�d

herewith as Annexure P-11 (Page No .....to .....)
' ' ,'

B. INTERNAL
. . .
ROAD
.'
:

The internal roqi;:ls are of s4b standard quality. In fact, in the

Annexure N of agreement to sale, internal common tar roads were
promised. However, the opponents have constn"c;ted the roac;l with
material of extreme poor quality; <JS a result the road surface has
been coming off in p,;1tches after i;:leveloplng cracks. Further the roads
are not pr9perly leveled resulting in low lying spots in many places.
Thus there is water log�ing in the complex during monsoon. As the
qucJlity of the roads is very poor, it is necessc:iry to direct the·
opponents to provide proper quality internal tar roads for the
complainants' complex with as promisec;I in agreement to sale.

True copies of the photographs of photographs of internal road ar1:1

enclosed herewith as Annexure P-12 (Page No .. ,....to .......... )

C. ENTRANCE GATE:
 162
The complain\lnts svbmit that \lS on date, the entire complex has
two points for entry/exit. Of these only one point has a security
enclosure and iron gates while the entry/exit! point which in fact is
qirectly connected to the public road is open and not provided with
any secured entrance /exit facility such as proper iron gates and
security enclosure . The builder has aiso not pr'ovided the permanent
cabin for security guard and compound wall. T�is is resvlting intr;> a
serious security hazards for the residents as the c9mplex has become
easily accessible to the outside public. As a result the cqmplainants
were constrained to make some temporary arrangements out of
thElir own funds. The complainants submit that it is the duty of
builder to provide a permanent structure for the second entrance
/exit, security cabin and compound wall. The complainants therefore
pray that the Bvilder be directed ti:;> provide permanent secured
entry/exit, security cabin �nd compound wall for the complex as
narrated above.

True copil;!s of photograph:; of entrance/exit, [security cabin and

fence are enclosed herewith as Annexure . P-13 (Page ·
No...........to .......... )

D. Underground Water·tank:
I, ,' ' {. !·, • ,( . . . ••j •••

The c9mplainants submit that then� are serious lapses on the part of
Builder in respect of the underground water tank. The same are
enumerated below:

i) The water overflow ovtlet of Fire water tank to Hollyhock society.

water tank is lower by 160 mm than that of winter garden sqciety.
Due to thi$ the water flows c;firectly into Hollyhock society's water
tank first and once their water tank is filled fully, water overflows
into winter garden society'� water tank. This is cavsing great
inconvenience to the residents of winter garden society.

ii) The water proofing and plastering to this water tank is not done.
 163
iii) There is a bare concrt:;te surface left as it is after completing the
concrete and de-shuttering.

iv) The quality of honey combing is l;la(.l and is not attended to fQr a
long time. As a result the reinforcements have started corroding
fvrther contaminating the store(.l water.

v) C1,Jt Concrete cores are not rem.oved from the tank. Ever
Shuttering ply, binding wires, nails etc are not still lying inside thf;!
tank.

vi) NRV fitted to fire suction pump are completely rusted anc;I nqn
operational.
'

The complainants submit that they have been following UP with

builder the above mentioned issues repeatedly. In fact the
.. fepr.esentative of (3uilder has ac;lmitted in one of the l'f1ails that he
shall rectify the same. However like all other grievances this
complaint of the complainant was not resolved by the Bvilder.
However taking into consideration the inconvenience being caused
to the complainants it is pri;iyed th�t the Builder !;>e directed to
remove the o<rficiencies in this respe�t as prayed in the pri;iyer clause.
. I
Tr1,1e copy of photographs
' of water tank are enclosed her_ ew1th as
.
•

Annexure P- 14 (Page N9. to )

E. E!eci:ricity P9w�r �ubst_�tion: •

The complainants submit that the Power sybstati1;m provided for the
entire complex by Builder is open insteac;I of a closed one. This is very
dangerovs posing threat to the lives of the resid1,mts. This act on the
part of builc;ler i�elf shows his casual approach and attitude towards
the safety of the residents. The said power substati9n is very near to
Angelica and is likely to cause a major accident in case of any mishi!P•
It is therefore· req1,1ested that the Builder be directed to cover the
said electricity power �ul;lstation prqperly with good quality
permanent material.
 164
True copies of 'Photo�raphs of power su'bstation are e.nclosedl
herewith a,s Annexure P-15 (Pag. e N'o. to }1

3. The Complainants submit that they have approached and

knocked each and every door avai.la' bl' e to them to get justice.
However nothing much happened at the administrative l'evels of
Government or even at the ,hands of opr;onents. 'Hence the
Conrtplainants are constrained to approach this Hon'ble Commission
wi:th the prayers "s mentioned below. The compla1 inants submit that
the present Buil1der has faced the consumer cqmplaints i,n respect 9.f
his other two projects too and has honored his contractual and legal
obligations only after a, verdict against hirn1 from the respective
consumer courts. Th.is speaks volumes about the ,attitude and
appro
. ach of Build·er.
4. The compl!9i, nants, siubmit that, it can be $een from the above
mentioned' pleadings that the opponents are gui.lty of deficiency i1n
servi�e and al1 so for adopting unfair tra,de pr-actice by not honoring
their ,c0, 11tractual and legail obligati'ons. The �omplainants are
therefore b�fore this Hon,' ble Commission to seek justice. f
'LIMITATION:

The Cornpl' ainants submit that the Oppon�nts have neither obtained
the occupancy certificate nor have they executed conveyance 1in
favor of society. l'n such a situation there is a contim,Jin,g, cause of
action and thus the said application is not b<;1•rred by law of !imitation.

7. JURISDICTl,ON
'

The Complainants submit that since they are e:1-aiming the relief of
executiion of conveyance, the project cost of sai1 d �roject is taken into,
consideration while deciding the pecuniary j.urisdiction, The project
· cost ofthe said project is abQve one e:;rore and hence nnorietary r�li�f
claimed by th� Complainants 'is within, the Pecuniary Jurisdiction of
 165
this Hon'ble Commission and hence they have tiled tne present
compl,ain, t a.pplication before this Hon'ble ,commission.
."
8. The requisit, e court fee stamp is p· aid 'QY the Complainants.

9. The complI ai,nant craves leave oii thi1 s Honourable court to add,
delete or to modify the pleadings in case it ls necessary iri the
interest of justice and further to file additional documents wi1th the
kind permission of this Honourable commiss.ion.

HENCE l"f' IS PRAYED:

That, thi� ,compta·int may kind!Y b_e altowed as follows:

"' I I"

a) The Opponents be directed to furni,sh occupancy certificate and

execute conveyance. fhe Opponents be dir,ected to pay
compensation @' orf Rs. 500/� per day to each Complainant from the
date of formation of soci1ety ti'II execution of conveyance as. per
: tne
list filed at Exh "C".

b) Th€ Opponents be directed to construct club ha1,Jse equipioed

with l' atest gym e, quipment$<,. squash, court, pool table and table
tennis.

c) Th� Opponents be directed to properly construct the swimming

pool alo' ng wi1 th all the necessary set up as described in paragraph no.
(V)(4) (A) of cQmplaint a.pplication.

d) The Opponents be directed tQ pay an interest @18% on Rs.

20,000/- to each Compl:ai, nant from the d�=ite of payment tilil
construction of club house,

e) The opponents be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2 Lac. s along

with interest @18% as narrated in paragraph no. (V)(4)A of
complaint.

f} The Opponents be directed to provide amphitheatre as mentioned

in Annexure N of agreement to �ai'le.
 166
g) Trie Opponents be directed to construct permanerrtI
1 gate, secuintv
cabin and, fence at the ent,r-ance as prayeq 1in paragraph no ,v)(4HCJ

h) The opponents be di1rected to make necessary provision ensuring

that the water tanks meant for hollyhock society and winter garden
society are filled simultcineausly by the overfl1 ow from fire water
tank.

i), The opponents be directed to complete the internaI' repairs and

plastering of domestic water tanks with due finish,ing as per standard
practice. The opponents be also directed to clean remove the debris
lying in the water tanks and ensure they are clean and free of debri,s
and foreign bodi@s.

j) The oppon�nt\s be directed to enclose the power substat,ion as

prayed in paragraph no. (V)1{4)(E)

k) The Opponent be c;J,ir,ected to pay an amount qf Rs. 5000/-i:;ier

Complainant bv way, ,of i;:ompensation for th� mental and physica'i
1harassrnent caused to them.

I) The Opponent be di-rected to pay Rs.. 1,00,000/- by way of (:ost of

litigatiQn.

m) That any other rnlief to which the complainant is entitled in law

and equity may ki'nc;Jly be granted to tihe complainant.

FOR THIS ACT OF KINON ESS, THE COMPtAl,NAN1TS, S'HALL EVER PRAV
1
1

DATE:
Hli.ED BY:
- j
¾ �

Advocate for the Complainant

 167
ANNEXURE A-6

BEFORE THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION, NEW DELHI

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 3505 OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:-

Aparna Deepak Pande and 5 Others ... Complainants

Versus

Mis. Cosmos Constructions and Anr. . .. Opposite Parties

REPLY BY OP1 TO THE AMENDED PETITION FILED BY THE

COMPLAINANT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH

1. At the outset, the answering Opposite Party No.1 deny each

and every averment, allegation and contention made in the

Complaint against the Opposite Party No.1 and nothing may be

deemed to be admitted for want of traverse.

PRELIMINARY SUBMISSIONS:

2. The answering Opposite Party No.1 is a Company registered

under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 having its

registered office at the address mentioned in the above cause

title and engaged in the business of development, construction,

redevelopment of residential and commercial projects.

3. That the Opposite Party No.1 developed/erected a residential

complex, after obtaining all necessary approvals and

permissions from the concerned authorities, named Cosmos

 168

Lounge comprising of four buildings vrz. Orchid, Angelica,

Hollylock and Winter Garden on the land bearing gut no. 59A

and others situated at village Chitalsar-Manpada in accordance

with the plans sanctioned by the Thane Municipal Corporation

under V.P. No. 2005/160.

4. That the Occupation Certificate for Building No.1 i.e. Orchid

was granted by the Thane Municipal Corporation on

04.08.2010. In pursuance thereof, Agreement to Sale was

entered into between the Opposite Party No.1 at different times

with various flat buyers.

5. That an application dated 20.04.2010 was made by the OP1 to

the Thane Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as

"TMC") for issuance of the Occupation Certificate of Building

No.2 and plinth certificate of the Club House. Application was

followed by several reminders thereafter vide letter dated

09.09.2011 for Occupation Certificate of building No.2 and

Plinth Certificate of Club House and application for occupation

certificate of building No.3. A copy of application dated

20.04.2010and letter dated 09.09.2011 has been annexed

herewith as ANNEXURE-A(COLLY).

6. Thereafter in order to avoid delay and inconvenience to the

buyers, possession of the flats of all four building were handed

over to the respective flat purchasers in 2010.

 169

7. That vide letter dated 23.07.2012 TMC rejected the applications

of the OP1 for Occupation Certificate for building No.2 and 3

and Plinth Certificate for Club House.

8. That vide letter dated 24.07.2012 OP1 requested and informed

Thane Municipal Corporation that application for OC was

submitted with all formalities duly complied with in 2010 itself

and so further demand for NOC (No Objection Certificate) from

ULC (Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act hereinafter

referred to as "ULC Act" ) authorities was never a condition till

that time. Issue with respect to validity of the development

schemes which were initially approved u/s 20 and 21 of the

erstwhile ULC Act is pending for decision in the Supreme Court

and decision of the same would be binding. Opposite Party

No.1 asserted that NOC from the ULC authorities is not related

to the issue of the grant of occupation certificates and hence

the same cannot be treated as a precondition and requested to

provide water supply to building No.2 and 3 and assess the

buildings as authorized structures. A copy of the letter dated

23.07.2012 issued by Thane Municpal Corporation has been

annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-8 and a copy of the letter

dated 24.07.2012 issued by OP1 has been annexed herewith

as ANNEXURE-C.

9. That TMC replied vide letter dated 27.08.2012 to OP1

demanding NOC and extension order dated 27.09.89 from

 170

Urban Land Ceiling(ULC) department.. A copy of the letter

dated 27.08.2012 issued by Thane Municipal Corporation to

OP1 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-D.

10. That the OP1 further made an application dated 29.01.2013 to

TMC for occupation certificate of building No.4. A copy of the

application dated 29.01.2013 has been annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-E.

11. That a Writ Petition No.178 of 2013 was filed by Opposite Party

No.1 against State of Maharashtra through Urban Development

Department, Mumbai, TMC and others seeking quashing of

letter dated 23.07.2012, 27.08.2012, and declaration of deemed

OC and seeking provisional OC for building no.2 and 3. A copy

the Writ Petition No.178/2013 filed before High Court of

Mumbai has been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-F.

12. Thereafter OP1 sent a letter dated 18.03.2013 to TMC seeking

approval for amended plans for the development of the balance

plot i.e. Gut No. 59A/2/G/2/2, 59A/2H.59A/168/2-1/2,59/A/38/1

by amalgamating the said balance plot with the land comprising

V.P. No. 160/2005 and by loading the FSI of the said balance

plot in V.P. No.160/2005. A reminder for the same was also

sent vide letter 18.11.2013 and 27.03.2015. A copy of the letter

dated 18.03.2013, 18.11.2013 and 27.03.2015 has been

annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-G(COLLY).

 171

13. Thereafter again TMC rejected to approve the amended plan

and Occupation Certificate for building Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and

Plinth certificate of the Club house for want of MHADA's NOC

vide letter dated 16.08.2014. A copy of the letter dated

16.08.2014 issued by TMC to OP1 has been annexed herewith

as ANNEXURE-H. The construction of club-house is completed

upto plinth level however issuance of Plinth Certificate of Club

House is stuck due to requirement of NOC from MHADA.

MHADA has withheld NOC since long. Therefore there is delay

in commencing construction of Club House. As per the order

dated 12/04/2012 in RTS Rev. Appeal No. 191/2011 passed by

the Sub-Divisional Officer, Thane Division, Thane. MHADA

issued a Letter dated 7/3/2015 to handover an area

admeasuring 800 sq. mtrs. To MHADA, thereafter OP1 has

handed over in favour of MHADA an area admeasuring 800 sq.

mtrs. out of the said property. After acquiring possession of

800 sq. mtrs. Out of the said property, MHADA issued NOC

dated 24/3/2015 addressing to the Commissioner, Thane

Municipal Corporation in favour of OP1 for further process of

construction. The OP1 also handed over an area admeasuring

7200 sq. mtrs. out of the said property in favour of the said

Corporation for DP road as informed by the OP1.

14. That since TMC was not issuing the OC and other approvals

OP1 filed an application dated 15.06.2015 before Urban

Development Minister, Urban Development Department,

 172

Mumbai seeking sanction of amended plan, QC for the building

nos.2,3 and 4 and plinth certificate of the Club house. A copy

of the application dated 15.06.2015 has been annexed herewith

as ANNEXURE-1.

15. That vide order dated 10.07.2015, Urban Development

Minister, Urban Development Department, Mumbai directed to

charge penalty as per ready reckoner rate and up to the year in

which the application for QC was filed for the issuance of OC

and other approvals. A copy of the order dated 10.07.2015 has

been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-J. OP1 informed TMC

about the order vide letter dated 13.07.2015.

16. Thereafter TMC issued letter dated 22.09.2015 stating that OC

for building no.2, 3 and 4 would be issued subject to payment of

charges/penalty. A copy of the letter dated 22.09.2015 has

been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-K.

17. Due to sudden demise of one of the active partners of the OP1,

Late Suraj Ramesh Parmar on 7/10/2015; there was

tremendous pressure on the organization of OP1 from various

anti social elements and due to such reasons caused

reasonable delay in making future compliances.

18. That OP1 wrote letter dated 26.02.2016 to TMC requesting for

bifurcation of the various charges and penalty, method of

calculation of compounding of offences charges and details of

 173

the ready reckoner rates of the concerned years for calculating

the compounding offences charges for making payment for

issuance of occupation certificates for buildings nos. 2, 3 and 4

as per order dated 10.07.2015. A copy of the letter dated

26.02.2016 has been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-L.

19. Thereafter a letter dated 02.03.2016s was written by OP1 to

Angelica CHS i.e. building no.2, Hollylock CHS i.e. building

no.3, and Winter Garden i.e. building no.34 apprising them

about the prevailing position in obtaining Occupancy certificate.

At no point of time OP1 intended to hide anything from the flat

owners and tried their best to keep them updated about each

and every issue.OP1 informed the societies that pursuant to the

order of Urban Development Department, TMC has issued a

demand on 22.09.2015 thereby levying very heavy penalty and

other charges amounting to approximately 7 crores. Major

chunk of the charges was levied on account of the fact that the

flats were allowed to _be occupied by the flat buyers without

grant of OC. It is submitted that to keep the promise of delivery

of possession of the flats as expeditiously as possible within the

promised time period OP1 had delivered possession in 2010

itself to the flat buyers. OP1 had submitted applications for OC

timely along with necessary compliances, documents and

approvals but instead of issuing the same OP1 was foisted with

unreasonably high penalty for allowing flat buyers to occupy the

flats without occupation certificate. OP1 informed the societies

 174

that they have wrote letters to TMC seeking clarification and

better particulars of the rate and method at which penalty was

charged and a reply was awaited from TMC in that regard. OP1

sought co-operation from the members of societies. A copy of

the letter dated 02.03.2016 has been annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-M.

20. That QP1 keep following from TMS through letters dated

07.02.2017, 16.02.2017, 27.02.2017 seeking modification of

order. QP1 in their continuous endeavor to obtain QC from

TMC made another effort and wrote a letter dated 10.10.2017

QP1 seeking some time for payment of charges mentioned in

letter dated 22.09.2015. A Copy of the letter dated 10.10.2017

has been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-N.

21. Thereafter QP1 wrote all three buildings a letter dated

03.02.2018 and requested them to produce documents for filing

application for QC under amnesty scheme of TMC. Thereafter a

letter dated 26/3/2018 was issued by QP1 to TMC seeking

permission to pay for the QC and other charges by installments

which was replied by TMC vide letter dated 28/3/2018 allowing

QP1 regarding payment of OC charges for building no. 2, 3 and

4 and plinth certificate for club house by installments.

Thereafter an amount of Rs.1,20,71,250/-,Rs.1,50,00,000/-,

Rs.50,00,000/- and Rs.50,00,000/- respectively was made by

QP1 to TMC towards QC charges for which receipts were

 175

issued by TMC and so till now more than 50% of the amount

has been paid to TMC by OP1. Thereafter a letter dated

4/4/2018 was issued by OP1 to the Angelica CHS i.e. Building

no. 2, Hollyhock CHS i.e. Building no. 3 and Winter Garden i.e.

Building no. 4 seeking NOC to get the amended plan

sanctioned, plinth certificate for club house and OC from TMC

which was not responded by the societies. Again a letter dated

8/5/2018 was issued by OP1 to the Angelica CHS i.e. Building

no. 2, Hollyhock CHS i.e. Building no. 3 and Winter Garden i.e.

Building no. 4 thereby requested for meeting to get the pending

issued resolved.

22. Thereafter an application dated 29/11/2018 filed by Architect,

Suvarna Ghosh application for grant of O.C for Bldg No. 2,3 & 4

and plinth certificate of club house. A copy of the letter dated

29.11.2017 by OP1 to thane Municipal Corporation for grant of

plinth certificate of Club House has been annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-O.

23. That the OP1 has applied, filed remainders and followed up

regularly for QC to the Thane Municipal Corporation for several

times. It is stated that Government had declared Amnesty

Scheme in the year 2017 for Maharashtra and the Corporation

has implemented the said scheme in the January 2018. Vide

letter dated 3/2/2018 OP1 requested the societies to produce

documents for filing application for QC under amnesty scheme

 176

of TMC. However, till today OP1 didn't receive any response

from the societies. A copy of the letter dated 03.02.2018 issued

by OP1 to societies has been annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-P. A copy of the letter dated 26.03.2018 issued

by OP1 to Thane Municipal Corporation to pay the charges has

been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-Q. A copy of letter

dated 28.03.2018 issued by Thane Municipal Corporation to OP

1 for payment of Occupancy Certificate penalty Charges in

installments for Building No. 2, 3 & 4 has been annexed

herewith as ANNEXURE-R. A copy of receipts dated

28.03.2018 issued by Thane Municipal Corporation regarding

part payment of Rs. 1,20,71,250/- made by OP1 as per letter

dated 28.03.2018 has been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE­

S. A copy of letter dated 04.04.2018 issued by OP 1 to

societies of Building No. 2, 3 & 4 for issue of NOC for

amendment of plans has been annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-T. A copy of letter dated 08.05.2018 issued by

OP 1 to societies of Building No. 2, 3 & 4 for request of meeting

to get the issues resolved has been annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE-U. A copy of receipts dated 13.07.2018 issued by

Thane Municipal Corporation regarding part payment of Rs.

1,50,00,000/- made by OP1 as per letter dated 28.03.2018 has

been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-V. A copy of letter

issued dated 26.11.2018 by OP1 to Thane Municipal

Corporation for grant of Occupancy Certificate for Building No.

 177

2, 3 & 4 & plinth certificate of Club House has been annexed

herewith as ANNEXURE-W. A copy of receipts dated

27.11.2018 issued by Thane Municipal Corporation regarding

part payment of Rs. 50,00,000/- made by OP1 as per letter

dated 28.03.2018 has been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE­

X. A copy of receipts dated 29.11.2018 issued by Thane

Municipal Corporation regarding part payment of Rs.

50,00,000/- made by OP1 as per letter dated 28.03.2018 has

been annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-Y.

24. That OP1 did all the construction and provided amenities in the

project as promised and stated in the Agreement for Sale. It is

further stated that advertisements and tools of advertisements

such as brochures are issued with the intention of only

informing customers or potential customers about the amenities

available in the project and not with intention to lure any

individual as alleged by the Complainant.

25. That the construction of the Club house is completed up to

plinth level however issuance of Plinth certificate of Club house

is stuck due to requirement of NOC from MHADA and payment

of charges for obtaining QC and other permissions. OP1 is

ready to construct the Club House as per the agreement after

receipt of the Plinth Certificate from the Thane Municipal

Corporation. OP1 through various letters as dated 20.04.2010,

09.09.2011, 23.07.2012, 27.03.2015, 15.06.2015, requested

 178

TMC to issue plinth certificate of Club House but the same has

been withheld by TMC without any fault on the part of OP1. It is

submitted the reason for the delay in construction of the Club

House is beyond the control of OP1 and the same is dependent

upon TMC for which OP1. could not be held liable.

26. That OP1 has already provided two gates for the entire

complex. There is a security cabin constructed at one entrance

gate of the premises nearby Building no.1, Orchid. OP1 has

erected one temporary cabin at another gate i.e. front side, also

as the construction of the remaining buildings at the front side

of the premises is yet to be completed. It is submitted that after

the construction of all the pending buildings at the front side

OP1 would construct the additional entrance gate over there

along with the security cabin. There will be three gates for the

entire complex amongst which two has already been

constructed by OP1.

27. That OP1 had constructed the internal roads by using good

quality material. It is submitted that the surface level of the road

was also proper but the societies of the buildings did not bother

to maintain the roads as wells as other amenities properly. After

using the same roughly for 7-8 years the societies are

expecting OP1 to repair the same. It is liability of the Societies

to maintain the internal roads . As far as Swimming pool and

Changing room is concerned, the same was constructed by

 179

OP1 in the year 2010-11 and since then the members of all

societies are enjoying it since 7-8 years, it is the responsibility

of the societies to maintain it properly.

28. That in the year 2017 OP1 got the complaint from the societies

regarding common water tank for building no.3, Hollyhock and

building no.4, winter garden. The officials and technical staffs of

OP1 went there to resolve the issues however the staff got

assaulted by the residents and therefore nothing could be done

by OP1. Hence it is submitted that if the Societies co-operates,

needful would be done by OP1. Pertinently, OP1 provided the

water tank with all its finishing completed in all aspects but now

societies are demanding fresh finishing/renovation of water

tanks after using it regularly for 7-8 years. It is submitted that

the societies have taken the possession of the same 7-8 years

back and are using since then hence it is responsibility of the

societies to maintain it and do the needful.

29. Further it is submitted that after the completion of construction

of balance buildings of the premises OP1 would execute the

Conveyance Deed in favour of the federation of the societies.

OP1 will construct five more buildings on the balance part of the

said property. In Agreements for Sale it is mentioned that the

OP1 will construct more buildings in future by utilizing entire

available FSI or by utilizing TOR acquired from outside on the

said property and the conveyance of the said property will be

 180

executed after completing entire construction of the project in

favour of the federation of the societies. . As far as the issue of

power substation is concerned, OP1 has erected the power

sub-station as per the norms of the Thane Municipal

Corporation and now it is the duty of the society to maintain the

same. It is informed that OP1 are discussing about the same

with the concerned authorities.

PARA WISE REPLY

30. With reference to Para 1, it is submitted that the contents

mentioned therein are matter of facts and do not warrant any

reply however it is denied that the present Consumer Complaint

is being filed in representative capacity for and on behalf of the

Consumers who have purchased flats in Cosmos Lounge

project. The Opposite Party No.1 states that no such leave

should be granted to the Complainants as contemplated under

Sec.12(1 )(c) read with Order 1 Rule 8 of CPC read with Sec.

21 (a) of the Consumer Protection Act. The Opposite Party No.1

also denies that the main grievance of the various consumers

including the Complainants above named is that the Opposite

Party No.1 has adopted unfair trade practice or their is grave

deficiency in their services or failed to execute conveyance

deed or procure occupation certificate. The Opposite Party

No.1 submits that delay in obtaining OC is beyond the control of

the Opposite Party No.1 and thus the Opposite Party No.1 is

not liable for the same. On several times OP1 has tried to
 181

obtain OC from the Thane Municipal Corporation by filing

applications and reminders.

31. With reference to Para 2, it is submitted that the contents

mentioned therein are matter of facts and do not warrant any

reply.

32. With reference to Para 3, it is denied that any picture of being

the "best project" were portrayed or any huge publicity done of

the same. It was stated that amenities will be provided as

promised and stated in the Agreement for Sale. It is further

stated that advertisements and tools of advertisements such as

brochures were issued with the intention of only informing

customers or potential customers about the amenities available

in the project and not with intention to lure any individual as

alleged by the Complainants. It is denied that the Complainants

purchased the flat based on the representation made by the

employees of the Opposite Party No.1 or being lured by the

advertisements and brochures of the project.

33. With reference to Para 4 it is submitted that the contents herein

are wrong hence denied. It is reiterated that allamenities and

facilities of good quality as per Agreement to sale was provided

by Opposite Party No.1 to the Complainants. Materials of

superior quality were used for all constructions and finishing's.

Every possible effort has been made to obtain Occupancy

Certificate and completion of Club house by the Opposite Party

 182

No.1. It is denied that there are any lapses resulting in threat to

life, health and safety of residents of Cosmos Lounge.

Complainants may be put to strict proof of levelling these kind

of absurd and mindless allegations against the Opposite Party

No.1. Meetings have taken place between the Opposite Party

No.1 and the Complainants to address the issue of Occupation

Certificate etc. and Opposite Party No.1 are making all possible

endeavor to obtain the same. The Opposite Party No.1 have

fully abided with all the terms and conditions mentioned

Commencement Certificate and Agreement to Sale.

REPLY TO GROUNDS OF COMPLAINT

I. OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE

34. With reference to the contents of para 1(1) it is submitted that

the same is wrong hence denied. It is submitted that the issue

of OC'shas been dealt in detail in above paragraphs from ----to

----. Hence it is clear that OP1 are doing their best possible

efforts to obtain the same from TMC and have also asked the

three societies to give the requisite documents so that

occupation certificates could be procured under the Amnesty

scheme of the government which is in effect for a limited period

i.e. till ----. A writ Petition No.178/ filed by OP1 is also pending

before High Court of Bombay on the issue of occupation

certificate. It is denied that there is any deficiency in service by

the OP1.
 183

II. CONVEYANCE
35. With reference to Para II (1and 2), is submitted that after the

completion of construction of balance buildings of the premises

OP1 would execute the Conveyance Deed in favour of the

federation of the societies. It is denied that .OP1 are not

executing the conveyance deed as they want to avail the FSI or

want to exploit the open land of the project. Further it is denied

that the OP1 is liable to pay any compensation to the

Complainant's as OP1 have continuously and honestly with all

possible efforts have involved in getting the OC for all three

buildings and its up to the concerned authority to issue the

same. The Thane Municipal Corporation issued a Letter dated

28/3/2018 to OP1 and thereby charged huge amount against

issuing QC for the Building no. 2, 3 and 4, Plinth Certificate for

Club House and further permissions and also granted time of

one year for making the payment by installments. Accordingly

OP1 has paid more than 50% of the entire amount and vide

Letter dated 26/11/2018 through Architect OP1 again sought

QC and Plinth Certificate of Club House from the Thane

Municipal Corporation. OP1 expect OC and Plinth Certificate of

Club House before 31/3/2019. Only Club House out of the

comm.on amenities agreed by the OP1 for the said project is

pending.

36. With reference to Para Ill (1) A, B Amphi Theatre was never a

part of the common amenities as per the Agreement. and (2)

 184

and (3), it is submitted that contents of the same is wrong

hence denied. It is submitted that the OP1 had provided all the

amenities of superior quality as per the agreement for sale and

as promised. The construction of club-house is completed upto

plinth level however issuance of Plinth Certificate of Club

House was stuck due to requirement of NOC from MHADA.

MHADA had withheld NOC since long. Therefore there is delay

in commencing construction of Club House. Issue of swimming

pool has also been dealt in above para no---. It is reiterated that

it is the responsibility of the societies to maintain and repair the

swimming pool and other amenities after using it regularly for 7-

8 years. It is denied that the Opposite Party No.1 had

enumerated number of amenities only with intention to induce

the complainants to buy flats in the project. It is denied that

there is any deficiency in service by OP1 in providing any

services or amenities as per agreement for sale. It is denied

that the OP1 is liable to pay any interest on any amount.

Ill. AMENITIES PROVIDED WITH SUBSTANDARD QUALITY

37. With reference to Para IV (A),(B), (C), (D) and (E) it is

submitted that the same are wrong hence denied. It is

submitted that;

(A) Swimming pool and Changing room have been

constructed by OP1 in the year 2010-11 and since then

the members of all societies are enjoying it and it is the

responsibility of the societies to maintain it properly. It is

 185

stated that the Complainants are using it continuously

and are not at all paying any attention for its maintenance

and over a period of time, after continuous usage each

amenity requires maintenance. It is denied that OP1 is

liable to pay any refund or interest towards it. It is the

liability of the society to maintain all the amenities.

(B) Issue of internal roads has been dealt in detail above in

Para 24. Hence it is the responsibility of societies to

maintain and repair the internal roads and not of OP1.

(C) Issue of Entrance gate has been dealt in detail in above

paras.

(D) issue of Underground Water Tank has also been dealt in

detail in above paras OP1 has constructed water tank as

per the norms of the Thane Municipal Corporation. The

Societies are using the water tank since 7-8 years and

never made complaints regarding the same. We are

ready to rectify the deficiencies if the Societies co­

operate.

(E ) OP1 has erected the power sub station as per the norms

of the Corporation by taking all the safety measures.

The Societies are liable to maintain the same as the

same was erected 7-8 years back. Photographs filed by

 186

the Complainants shows lack of proper maintenance of

the power sub station by the society.

38. With reference to Para 3, it is submitted that the contents of the

same are wrong hence denied. OP1 has on various occasions

tried to contact the society officials; however they refused for

meeting. Previously also OP1 has on several times conducted

meetings with the society to solve their issues in OP1 's office

and also in the complex and resolved their issues.

39. With reference to Para 4, it is submitted that the contents of the

same are wrong hence denied. It is denied that OP1 is guilty of

any deficiency in services or adopted unfair trade practices. In

fact OP1 are dedicated and are indulged in constant endeavor

to provide services and amenities as promised or as per

agreement for sale. The delay in getting OC or approvals is

beyond the control of OP1, the Opposite Party denies that the

Complainants are capable to file the instant complaint in

representative capacity. It is stated that the Opposite Party

No.1 has always acted in the interest of its customers and

despite of suffering hardships due to reasons mentioned above,

the Opposite Party No.1 has continued to develop the project

and complete it. It is reiterated that the delay is on account of

factors beyond the control of the Opposite Party No.1 and in

spite of setbacks, the Opposite Party No.1 has continued the

work and strived to complete the project. The Opposite Party

 187

No.1 states and submits that the Opposite Party No.1 and

certain representative's members of the Purchasers, have been

holding regular meetings with the Opposite Party No.1 and their

representatives to work out a solution which is in the best

interest of all the purchasers' project and to avoid litigation. The

Opposite Party submits that advertisements and tools of

advertisements such as brochures were issued with the

intention of only informing customers or potential customers

about the amenities available in the project and not with

intention to 'lure' any individual as alleged by the Complainant.

It is denied that cause of action is in a continuing cause and

therefore the Complaint is within limitation. Since last 7-8 long

years Complainants have been enjoying the amenities and

services and never raised any issue as such. Moreover, the

Complainants choose to take possession willingly way back in

2010 without occupation certificate hence they could not be

permitted after 7-8 years to raise these issues.

40. With reference to Para ?and 8, it is denied that this Hon'ble

Commission has the necessary pecuniary jurisdiction to deal

and decide file the instant complaint. It is further denied that

cause of action is in a continuing cause and therefore the

Complaint is within limitation. Content of Para 8 is a matter of

record hence needs no reply.

 188

41. With reference to Para 9, the Opposite PartyNo.1 further

submits that the Complainants are not entitled to any of the

prayers sought in Para 9 (a) to (m) of the complaint. The

Complaint is absolutely baseless without any merit and

discloses no cause of action or any deficiency of service or

unfair trade practice. The Opposite Party submits that the

Opposite Parties No.1 have not committed any alleged

deficiency of services or unfair trade practices as against the

Complainants. It is clear that the intention of the Opposite

Party No.1 was/is genuine, clean and bonafide. The

Complainants have filed the present complaint by suppressing

various true facts from this Hon'ble Court and thus tried to

mislead this Hon'ble Court. No.1 if the reliefs as prayed for by

the Complainants are granted.

42. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is prayed

that the complaint filed by the Complainants itself is not

maintainable hence deserves to be dismissed, with heavy

exemplary costs.

FILED BY

(MAHESH AGARWAL)
ADVOCATE FOR OPPOSITE PARTY NO.1
19, BABAR ROAD, BENGALI MARKET
NEW DELHl-110001
PH: 011 422 00000
PLACE: NEW DELHI
DATED:__2018
 189

IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMERS DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMIS�ilON, NEW DELHI
CONSUMER CASI:: NO. 3505 OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Apama Deepak Pande and 5 othern Complainant

Versus

Mis Cosmos Constructions and ors. Opposite Parties

AFFIDAVIT

I, Mr. Manish Mehta, aged 46 yea ·s, S/o Gyanchand Mehta Partner of
Opposite Party No.1 having my office at, 201, Arihant building, Agyari
lane, Tembhi naka, Thane (West) 400601 do hereby solemnly affirm
and state as under:
1. That I am the Partner of the Opposite Party No: 1 of Company in
the aforesaid matter and I a.m well acquainted with all the facts
and circumstances of the ca:;e and as such I am duly authorized
NOtARIAL
J,... -
to swear this affidavit.
2. That I have read and understood the contents of the
accompanying reply filed on behalf of the Opposite Party No., in
the aforesaid matter and state that the same are true and correct
to my knowledge/information as derived from the records of the
Company, no part thereof is false and nothing material has been
concealed therefrom.

NOTARIAL
VERIFICATION:
I, the above named Deponent, do hereby verify that the contents stated
herein above are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and

(��
belief and nothing material has bee.1 concealed therefrom.
Verified at Thane on this 3,·d da

-,�

�3 DEC208
 ANNEXURE A-7 190
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI

CONSUMER CASE NO. 3505 OF 2017

WITH
IA/4491/2018(Extension of Time Filing Written Statement),IA/13954/2018(Amendment of complaint)
1. APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & 5 ORS.
46 YEARS,OCCU;HOMEMAKER R/O 17B,HOLLYHOCK
CHS ITD,COSMOS LOUNGE,
MANPADA THANE
WEST-400610 ...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS & ANR.
THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR MR.MANISH MEHTA
AGE,MAJOR OCCU BUISENESS, AT, COSMOS
CONSTRUCTION COSMOS HOUSE,BEHIND TMC
OFFICE, SANT DNYANESHWAR ROAD,
PANCHPAKHADI,
THANE (W)
2. M/S DAHYABHAI &CO.PVT LTD.
THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY 121,MITTAL
TOWER,C-WING,12TH FLOOR,NIRMAN POINT
MUMBAI-400021 ...........Opp.Party(s)
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. DR. S.M. KANTIKAR,PRESIDING MEMBER

For the Complainant : Ms. Pranali Sawant, Advocate

Ms. Prachiti Deshpande, Advocate
For the Opp.Party : For Opposite Party No. 1 : Mr. Sachin Datta, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Swati Sinha, Advocate
For Opposite Party No. 2 : ex-parte

Dated : 05 Dec 2018

ORDER
1. Settlement has not been arrived at between the parties.

2. Heard learned counsel for the complainants and learned senior counsel for the builder co. – opposite
party no. 1. Learned senior counsel submits that efforts for procuring the occupation certificate is on and it
will be ready within a month and will be provided in a short time.

3. Heard the arguments on the application under Section 12 (1) (c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
The requirement under Section 12 (1) (c) is fulfilled in this case. Accordingly permission for a public notice
in terms of Section 13 (6) of the Act, 1986 read with Order 1 Rule 8 CPC be published in newspapers –
“The Times of India” (English), and “Maharashtra Times” (Marathi), both stated to be published from and
circulated in Mumbai, for 06.03.2019. The public notice shall be published in the font size ‘11’ or a bigger
font size. The application stands disposed of.

CC/3505/2017
4. Consequent to grant of permission u/s 12 (1)(c) of the Act, 1986 the complaint is admitted, subject to
just exceptions.
191
5. In pursuance to the last Order dated 28-09-2018 a copy of amended complaint has been supplied to the
opposite parties.

6. The opposite parties if wishes to contest the allegations in the complaint, they may file the written
statement within 30 days from today, failing which their right to file written statement may be closed.

7. On receipt of copy of written version, the complainants shall file its rejoinder and affidavit of evidence
within four weeks and provide a copy of the same to counsel for the opposite parties. Thereafter, opposite
parties shall file their affidavit of evidence within four weeks and supply copy to the other side.

8. List the matter on 06-03-2019 for further proceedings.

......................
DR. S.M. KANTIKAR
PRESIDING MEMBER
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
192
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A. NO. _________ OF 2023
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO. ______ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS … Appellant/

Applicant
Versus
APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & ORS. ... Respondent(s)

APPLICATION FOR STAY

TO,
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS OTHER COMPANIONS JUDGES
OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.

THE HUMBLE APPLICATION OF THE

APPLICANT ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULL SHOWETH AS UNDER:

1. The Applicant has been constrained to invoke the Appellate Jurisdiction

of this Hon’ble Court under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act,
1986, (“the 1986 Act”) to challenge the final Judgment and Order dated
12.06.2023 passed by the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission, at New Delhi (“the Ld. NCDRC”) in Consumer Complaint
No. 3505 of 2017 whereby the Ld. NCDRC erroneously partly allowed
the Complaint filed by the Respondents Flat owners.
2. That the detailed facts and circumstances pertaining to the instant case
193
have been set out in the Captioned Civil Appeal and as such are not being
repeated herein for the sake of brevity. The Applicant i.e., the instant
Appellant craves liberty to refer to and rely upon the same as and when
this Application is taken up for hearing.

3. That by way of the Impugned Order the Ld. NCDRC has erroneously
allowed the Consumer Complaint filed by the Respondents in part, inter
alia, with the following directions: -

“26. In view of the discussion above, the Consumer Complaint is

partly allowed with the following directions to the Opposite Parties
to: -

A. Obtain the Occupation Certificate for Building No.4 (Winter

Garden) within four months of this Order by filing application for
its grant with concerned authority exclusively for Building No.4
and the club house;

B. Pay the Complainants/ allottees of Building Nos.2&3 (Angelica

and Hollyhock respectively) a delay compensation @ Rs.2.0 lakhs
each, within a period of four months, failing which an interest rate
of 6% p.a. would be levied on this amount from the date of this
Order;

C. Pay a delay compensation of Rs.2.0 lakhs to the Complainants/

allottees of Building No.4 within four months of this Order, failing
which an interest rate of 6% per annum would be payable on this
amount from the date of this Order;

D. In case of delay of obtaining the Occupation Certificate for

Building No.4 (Winter Garden), beyond four months, the
 Complainants/ allottees of this Building shall be paid delay
194
compensation @ 6% per annum on their deposited amount from
respective dates of taking possession till the grant of Occupation
Certificate. The amount of Rs.2.0 lakhs already paid as per Order
above at © shall be adjusted from this amount to be paid;

E. complete the construction of the club house within six months,

failing which a delay compensation @ 6% per annum on the
deposited amount for the club house by the allottees, shall be payable
from the date of this Order;

F. Complete all the amenities as given in Agreement for Sale within

six months…”

4. That the Ld. NCDRC erred in directing compensation to be paid by the

Applicant despite the following admitted facts:-
a. All 4 buildings were constructed as per the sanction plan;
b. All 4 buildings were constructed within time;
c. Possession of all units were handed over within time (2010-2013);
d. The applications for the OCs and Plinth Certificate for the Club House
were made without delay in 2010, 2011 and 2013 but only OC for
Building No. 1 was given in August 2010;
e. The TMC suddenly sought an NoC under the ULC in August 2012,
which was challenged in W.P. No.178 of 2013, and later found to be
unnecessary;
f. The TMC did not respond till 2014, when it demanded an NoC from
MHADA, which was immediately supplied in March 2015;
g. Again, in September 2015, TMC demanded 7.02 cr. as penalty,
including Rs.95.36 lakh as ‘Labour Welfare Tax’, which was dropped
in 2018, after which the remaining amount was paid without
prejudice to WP 178/2013; and
 h. The OC applications were again rejected on 12.07.2022, but after a
195
Writ Petition round, came to be granted for Building Nos. 2 & 3 on
21.03.2023;

5. The Ld. NCDRC erred in holding as under:-

I. The revised plans for 2 additional buildings being the reason for objection
to OC [Paras 13 & 17]: These revised plans to utilize the remaining area
were only submitted in 2013, long after the applications for OC were
submitted, and hence had no bearing on the OCs.
II. These two letters of TMC (22.09.2015 & 28.03.2018) clearly show that the
grant of OC was never an issue with TMC [Para 15]: A mere perusal of
these letters would show that the TMC was not issuing the OCs and had
conflated it with the issue of the revised plans, despite the Appellant’s
letter dated 27.03.2015 keeping it separate.
III. The delay of about a decade in obtaining the OC lies with the Developer
[Para 21]: This overlooks the continued obduracy of TMC despite
repeated reminders; the Applicant’s compliance of new conditions; the
reduced land area, and the penalty imposed.

6. The Applicant sent letters dated 20.04.2010, 09.08.2010, 09.09.2011,

24.07.2012, 29.01.2013, 27.03.2015, 01.06.2015, 15.06.2015, 26.11.2018,
29.12.2018, 24.10.2019, 06.12.2019, 02.01.2020, 05.02.2021 and
21.02.2022 seeking the OCs and the plinth certificate. Despite the vigilance
of the Applicant, the Ld. NCDRC has penalized it for the delays caused by
TMC and imposed delay compensation amounting to several crores despite
having paid penalty amounts.

7. That the Applicant has a good prima facie case on merits and the balance
of convenience is in his favour. Irreparable harm and injury may be
caused to the Applicant in the event the Application is not allowed.
 8. That the present application is being moved in the above mentioned
196
bonafide facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice.

PRAYER

It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to:

(a) Stay the operation of the final Judgment and Order dated 12.06.2023
passed by the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,
at New Delhi in Consumer Complaint No. 3505 of 2017

(b) Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS AND JUSTICE, THE APPLICANT

AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

FILED BY

KUSH CHATURVEDI
(Advocate for the Applicant/
Appellant)

FILED ON: 31.07.2023

PLACE: NEW DELHI
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
197
I.A. NO. _________ OF 2023
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO. ______ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS … Appellant/

Applicant
Versus
APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & ORS. ... Respondent(s)

APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING OFFICIAL

TRANSLATION OF THE DOCUMENT

TO,
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS OTHER COMPANIONS JUDGES
OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.

THE HUMBLE APPLICATION OF THE

APPLICANT ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULL SHOWETH AS UNDER:

1. The Applicant has been constrained to invoke the Appellate Jurisdiction

of this Hon’ble Court under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act,
1986, (“the 1986 Act”) to challenge the final Judgment and Order dated
12.06.2023 passed by the Ld. National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission, at New Delhi (“the Ld. NCDRC”) in Consumer Complaint
No. 3505 of 2017 whereby the Ld. NCDRC erroneously partly allowed
the Complaint filed by the Respondents Flat owners.
 198
2. That the detailed facts and circumstances pertaining to the instant case
have been set out in the Captioned Civil Appeal and as such are not being
repeated herein for the sake of brevity. The Applicant i.e., the instant
Appellant craves liberty to refer to and rely upon the same as and when
this Application is taken up for hearing.

3. That in view of the urgent nature of interim relief sought in the present
Appeal, the Applicant i.e., the instant Appellant has not been able to file
the official translation of ANNEXURE A-3 at (pgs. 141 to 150) annexed
in the Civil Appeal. Hence, this Application is being moved for
exemption.

4. That the Applicant i.e., the instant Appellant seeks exemption from filing
official translation of ANNEXURE A-3 at (pgs. 141 to 150) annexed in the
Civil Appeal.

5. That the present application is being moved in the above mentioned

bonafide facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice. No
prejudice will be caused to Respondents if the present Application is
allowed.

6. That the Applicant i.e., the instant Appellant has a good prima facie case
on merits and the balance of convenience is in his favour. Irreparable
harm and injury may be caused to the Applicant in the event the
Application is not allowed.

PRAYER

It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to:
 (a) Exempt the Applicant i.e., the instant Appellant from filing official199
translation of ANNEXURE A-3 at (pgs. 141 to 150) annexed in the Civil
Appeal.

(b) Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS AND JUSTICE, THE APPLICANT

AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

FILED BY: -

KUSH CHATURVEDI
(Advocate for the Applicant/
Appellant)

FILED ON: 28.08.2023

PLACE: NEW DELHI
 NDOH: SECTION:
200
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. ______ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS … Appellant

Versus
APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & ORS. ... Respondent(s)

INDEX OF FILING

S. NO. PARTICULARS COPIES COURT

FEES

1. CIVIL APPEAL WITH AFFIDAVIT & 1

VAKALATNAMA
2.
ANNEXURE A-1 TO A-7 1

3. AN APPLICATION SEEKING STAY OF 1

THE OPERATION OF THE IMPUGNED
ORDER

FILED ON: - 31.07.2023 FILED BY: -

SUNIL KUMAR MR. KUSH CHATURVEDI

CARD No. 5988 (Advocate - On- Record)
Mob. No. 9650705923 (AOR Card No. 1979)
Office: A-53, Sector 17-A,
Noida, Uttar Pradesh – 201301
Mob. No. 9711114870
Email: [email protected]
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
C.A. NO. _____ OF 2023
201
M/S. COSMOS CONSTRUCTIONS ... Appellant

Versus

APARNA DEEPAK PANDE & ORS. .... RespQndent(s)

VAKALATNAMA

I, Mr. Manish Mehta, Partner of M/s. Cosmos Constructions in the above

Appeal do hereby appoint and retain MR. KUSH CHATURVEDI, Advocate on
Record, Supreme Court of India, to act and appear for me/us in the above
W.P/Appeal/Petition/Reference and on my/our behalf to conduct and
prosecute (or defend) the same and all proceedings that may be taken in
respect of any application connected with the same or any decree or Order
passed therein, including proceedings, taxation and application for review, to
file and obtain return of documents and to deposit and receive money on
my/our behalf W.P/ Appeal/Petition/Reference and in application for review
to represent me/us and to take all necessary steps on my/our behalf in the
above matter. I/we agree to ratify all acts done by the aforesaid Advocate in
pursuance of the authority.

Dated this 26 th day of July 2023

� �- -As"' 1-h>.. R- M�ttr"'o.de__

0m �f\H/-"fSS( 19q
Accepted/Identified/ Certified/ Satisfied
For�����

pARTNER
(Manish Mehta)
ADVOCATE

MEMO OF APPERANCE
To
The Registrar
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi

Sir,
Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Appellant in the above matter.

Dated: 31.07.2023
The address for service of the said Advocate is:

A-53, Sector 17 A, Noida,

Uttar Pradesh - 201301,
(+91) 9711114870 KUSH CHATURVEDI
(Advocate)
 0

MEMO OF PARTIES 202

BEFORE THE NATIONAL CONSUMER QISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISS/ON,AT NEW DELHI
CONSUMER COMPIAINT 3505 OF 2017

In The Matter of
Mrs. Aparna Deepak Pande &Ors ... ,Complainant
Versus
M/s Cosmos Constructions &Anr .... Opposite Party

AMENDED MEMO OF PARTY

1. Mrs. Aparna Deepak Pande

R/o. 17B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd,
Cosmos lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-400610, Maharashtra.
2. Mr. Yashawant Ba/akrsfhna Shinde
R/o. 19B, Hollyhock CHS ltd,
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-400610, Maharashtra.
3, Mr. Kishor Shamf'ao Kumbhare
R/o. 19A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd,
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-400610, Maharashtra.
4. Mr.Ba/asahebAnandrao Babar
R/o. 1A, Winter Gargen CHS Ltd,
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-400610, Maharashtra.
5. Mr.Prodipta Baner'jee
R/o. 60, Angelfca CHS ltd, Cosmos
lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
6. Mr. Amar A, Chakote
R/o. 188, Angilica CHS ltd, Cosmos
lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
7. Mrs. Priyanka Shivalkar
R/o. 1-C, Winter Garden CHS ltd, .
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada,
ThaneWest-400610, Maharashtra.
8. Mr. Bhushan Rane
R/o. 2F, Winter Gar�en CHS Ltd,
Cosmos lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-400610, Maharashtra
9. Mr. Santosh Prabhakar Roundhal
R/o. 3A, Winter Garden CHS Ltd,
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
 212
Mrs. Khushbu Mahajan
R/o. 15A Hollyhock CHS �td, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
119 Mr. Girish V. Pawar
R/o. 15B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
120 Mr: SUhas J. Jadhav
Mrs. Shubhangi J. Jadhav
R/o. lSC Hollyh6ck CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
121 Mrs. Sushma S. Mohite
R/o. 15D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
122 Mr. Anarid V. Khanvilkar
Mrs. Truptl A. Khanvilkar
R/o. 16A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
123 Mrs·. Sheetal R. Modi
R/o. 16C Hollyho_ck CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
124 Mr. Amarelidra P. Singhdeo
Mrs. MonalishaSinghdeo
R/o. 16D Hollyhock CHS Ltd; Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
125 Mr. ManoJ J. Bhanda ry
Mrs. Krithika Bhandary
R/o. 17A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
126 Mr. Rakesh R, Modi
R /o. 17C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
127 Mr. Parag Des'al
R/o. 18A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
128 Mr. Gaurav Chodankar
R/o. 188 Hollyhock CHS Ltd,
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-400610, Maharashtra

129 Mr. Sundip R. P31

 213
Mrs.Sanch·eta S. Pal
R/o. 19A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
130 Mr. Blpin Panchal
Mrs, Geetha B, Panchal
R/o. 19C Hollyhock CHS ltd, Cosmos
lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
131 Mr. Ar!ndrajit Datta
Mrs. Baisall Datta
R/o. 19D Hollyhock CHS ltd, Cosmos
lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
132 Mr. Jaide.ep Singh Gadri
R/o. 20A Hollyhock CHS ltd, Cosmos
lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
133 Mr. Nirbhay D, Oeshmukh
Mrs. Rekha N. Deshmukh
R/o. 20B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
134 Mr. Sumit Banerjee
Mrs. Vaishaly Rajput
R/o. 20D, Hollyhock CHS Ltd,.
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-400610, Maharashtra.
135 Mr. Lokesh Sah
R/o. 10A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra,
136 Mrs. oeepti Maru
R/o. llA Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
137 Mrs. Vrutantl Shah
Mr. Nlkhil Shanbhag
R/o. 11B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
138 Mrs. Arnita R. Shetty
R/o. 18C Hollyhock CHS ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
139 Mr. Zuzer f',bbas Palanpurwala
Mrs. Vaneeta Zuzer Palanpurwala
R/o. 2C Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
•
214
Mr. Sandeep A. Keni
R/o. 3A Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos •
unge, Manpada, Thane West-
t
00610, Maharashtra.
141 Mrs. Seema K. Salgaonkar
R/o. 14B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
142 Mr. Arun A'. Pendhcirkar
R/o. 13B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
143 Mr. Vijay:M. Ah81e
R/o. 14A Hollyhock CHS ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
144 Mrs.UmaP. Choudhury
R/o. 2D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lo1,1nge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
145 Mrs. Seema V. Maynil
R/o. 2B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
.146 Mr. Yijfur S.Dhongade
Mrs. Ujwala Y. Dliongade spelling
R/o. 11D Hollyhock CHS ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Mahara·shtra.
147 Mr. Abha·y Jain
R/o. 10 Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
148 Mr. Rajesh Chandrakant Mirlekar
R/o. 4A Hollyhock CHS ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, M·anpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
149 M"rs. Soni A. Pawar
R/o. 8B Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
150 Mi's. Jyoti S. Rotey
R/o. BC Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
151 Mr. Raman.ind s. Mab.Ian
R/o. 9D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
152 Mrs. Oevyani J, Patkar
 •
•
215
R/o .. 17D Hollyhbck CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
153 Mr.1,Jday G. Dhuri.
R/o. 6C H0Jlyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane �est-
400610, Maharashtra.
154 Mr.· shaJI Mathew
R/o. 19 (:, Angelfca Garden CHS Ltd,
Cosmos Lounge, Manpada, Thane
West-400610, Maharashtra.

155 Mr. Ramdas A. Mankame

R/o. 208 Agelica CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
156 Mr. Sanjeev K� Kothari
R/o. 3B Agelica CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
157 Mr. Saurabh Paul
R/o. 70 Agelica CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
158 Mrs. Madhavi Mukharjl
R/o. 12D Agelica CHS Ltd, Cosmos
lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
159 Mr. Ashok Chanda
R/o. 20A Agelica CHS ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
160 Mr. Chandiesh G. Manek
R/o. 7C Age Iica CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
161 Mrs. Jyoti Saini
R/o. 3D Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
162 rvir. Bijoy Stellus
R/o. 14D Agellca CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
163 Mr.Arvlnd B. Chande
R/o. 6B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
164 Mr. AbhlshE!k Bt.irmcln
 216
R/o 12A, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
165 Mr. Harl Mohan Chaturvedl
R/o. 7C, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lovnge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra.
166 Mr. ,RM Chatuivedi
R/o. 7B, Hollyhock CHS Ltd, Cosmos
Lounge, Manpada, Thane West-
400610, Maharashtra. ..... Complaln.ints
Versus
1. M/s Cosmos Construction
Through Its Director,
Mr. Manish Mehta
Office at Cosmos House, behind
TMC office, Sant Onyaneshwar
Road, Panchnakhadi, Thane [WI
, . M/s Dahyabhai& Co. Pvt. Ltd
Through AR
121, Mittal Towers, C-Wing,
12th FloOr, Narfman Point, Mumbai. ....Respondents

Dated:-
Advocate for the complainant

VIRAi KADAM
414, New Lawyers, Chamber,

Supreme Court of lnd!a,

New Delhi-110001.