9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... back and forth with the owner, before finally releasing the flats in escrow in favour of the appellants. Further, as can be seen from the reliefs extracted supra, what has been claimed is the security of the title they received upon the respondent's default. The complaint case has not been filed seeking the flats in escrow for which the cause of action did arise on 10th July 2015, and hence the same limitation cannot be applied to a subsequent situation, which is that the appellants already have the flats with them. They only seek that the same be registered in their name and not alienated to any third party henceforth. The NCDRC have committed an error on the face of record. Finding the view taken by it to be ex-facie erroneous, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o complete such construction. The proposed redevelopment however could not be completed in the stipulated time, as such, on 10th January 2015, the respondents executed an "Indemnity- cum-Undertaking" to allot two flats numbered 301 and 302 having carpet area of 650 sq. ft. and 667 sq. ft. in B-Wing, free of cost, if necessary approvals could not be obtained within 6 months. This agreement further provided that if the respondents failed to give either of the two options to the appellants, they would be entitled to compensation for 1317 sq. ft. carpet area at market value plus 25% additional value thereon. 3. Vacant possession of the old flats was handed over in December 2014 and necessary monetary consideration for alternative accommodation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Andheri, Taluka Andheri situated at Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (East) Mumbai - 400 069, and have the Agreements in respect of the same, Registered with the Sub-Registrar of Assurances, Mumbai, in the name of the Complainants. AND/OR in the Alternative, This Hon'ble Court direct and order the opposite party to pay to the Complainants, a Sum of Rs.4,59,96,225/- (Rupees Four Crores Fifty-Nine Lakhs Ninety-Six Thousand Two Hundred Twenty-Five only) as market value and 25% compensation for the Flats and further interest thereon at the rate of 12% Per annum till payment or realization from the date of filing of this Complaint. b) That this Hon'ble Court, Direct and order the opposite party. The Opposite Party to be restrained by an o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... six months from the date hereof as mutually agreed by the parties in writing. None of the parties have produced any separate writing in respect of mutually agreed date as such, six months period has to be counted from 10.01.2015. Cause of action for enforcement of "Indemnity-cum-Undertaking" arose on 10.07.2015. This complaint was filed on 19.02.2019. The complaint is time barred and no application for condonation of delay has been filed." As such, the application for compensation was dismissed vide the impugned order. 6. In the facts above, the question that arises for our consideration pertains to the calculation of limitation in preferring the complaint case. According to the impugned order, six months are required to be counted from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had inter alia conveyed as under - 1. Further to the meeting held in our office on 12/10/2018,. It appears that Miss. Atita Shetty and her family are not satisfied with the nonperformance of the promises made by you, that you will tender an approved plan of proposed flat to be given to her and her family which you have failed and neglected to do as per her letter dated 16/11/2018, and accordingly has asked us to handover the escrow documents to her. 2. It was decided and agreed to handover the escrow documents to Miss Atita Shetty on 7th December, 2018 and the same was postponed to 14th December 2018. 3. Unfortunately, at the last moment you had called up in our office to cancel today's appointment, we have fixed it on Monday v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the escrow agent, who, in turn, did his own back and forth with the owner, before finally releasing the flats in escrow in favour of the appellants. Further, as can be seen from the reliefs extracted supra, what has been claimed is the security of the title they received upon the respondent's default. The complaint case has not been filed seeking the flats in escrow for which the cause of action did arise on 10th July 2015, and hence the same limitation cannot be applied to a subsequent situation, which is that the appellants already have the flats with them. They only seek that the same be registered in their name and not alienated to any third party henceforth. 11. Limitation, while important as a feature of law, is not meant to def ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
