No completion certificate: State forum allows appeal against district consumer commission’s decision
Sanjeev Kumar Gupta and his wife Anubhuti Gupta filed a case against Silvercity Housing & Infrastructure Ltd., Chandigarh and others, assailing the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s order dated August 2, 2023, wherein their complaint was dismissed holding that the complainants took possession of the flat in 2016 and the period of limitation expired in 2018
The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has allowed an appeal filed by a Dera Bassi couple after their complaint against a builder for allegedly not securing a completion certificate was dismissed by the district forum
Sanjeev Kumar Gupta and his wife Anubhuti Gupta filed a case against Silvercity Housing & Infrastructure Ltd., Chandigarh and others, assailing the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s order dated August 2, 2023, wherein their complaint was dismissed holding that the complainants took possession of the flat in 2016 and the period of limitation expired in 2018.
The couple have now alleged that the project was started in 2003-2004 and after 14 years, the it has not been completed and the completion or occupation certificate has not been issued to the builder.
As per the complainant, despite payment of 100% amount towards the amenities promised, they have not been provided.
The developer submitted that they were in possession of a partial completion certificate and since the appellants took possession of the flat in 2014 and did not point out any deficiencies for almost five years, their complaint has rightly been dismissed by the district forum.
The commission observed that the question was if the district commission could dismiss a complaint on the ground of limitation when the complainants have categorically averred that the opposite parties do not have a completion or occupation certificate. “Our answer to this question is in the negative,” it said.
“The district commission erred in dismissing the complaint. It should have decided on merit,” the state forum said.
The state commission remanded the case to the District Commission-II, Chandigarh.
“This order will not have a bearing on the merits of the case at the time of considering and deciding the consumer complaint by the district commission,” it added.
