Consumer forum slaps Rs 30,000 fine on builders for ‘wasting time’

Nagpur: The additional district consumer disputes’ redressal commission has slapped a Rs 30,000 fine on two builders for wasting the court’s precious time.
Asking the builders to deposit the amount with its ‘Consumers’ Legal Aid Fund’, a bench comprising presiding member Smita Chandekar and member Avinash Prabhune observed that the time wasted for dealing with respondents could have been utilized for other needy customers.
Quoting the Supreme Court’s verdict in the Damodar Prabhu versus Sayed Babalal’s case, the judges further imposed a Rs 20,000 fine each on both partners of ‘Maa Vaidehi Builders and Developers’ based at Hanuman Nagar in two other cases.
Collectively, a cost of Rs 70,000 has been imposed on the partners — Ravindra Fating and Nandu Ahirkar.
The complaint was lodged by Seema Bawane, a resident of Ravi Nagar, who approached the commission in 2018 after both builders failed to refund Rs 2.59 lakh.
The commission on October 20, 2018, had ordered both builders to refund the amount within a month. However, when they failed to comply with the orders, the complainant again filed a contempt case with the commission on February 6, 2019.
The builders submitted a compromise letter to the complainant on December 3, 2021, but again failed to fulfill their commitment. After both failed to respond to the commission’s warrant and summons repeatedly, the judges issued a notice to the police. Subsequently, Lakadganj police arrested Fating on July 26 and produced him before them. Thereafter, the complainant entered into a compromise deal with the complainant in order to escape punishment.
The judges, however, refused to show any leniency to both builders stating that they had caused a delay of four years in complying with their orders and thus wasted precious time. “They cannot be given liberty to fulfill the order according to their whims and fancies. If this happens, the importance/seriousness of the commission’s orders will be lost and would send wrong signals in the society. The possibility of the accused again violating the court’s orders cannot be denied and such tendency may increase if punishment is not meted out. Strict action is necessary to stop the daring/attitude to defy the judicial orders,” said the judges.
The judges also noted that the compromise with the complainant was made with an ulterior motive to avoid punishment as the builders were aware of the fact they had failed to comply with the commission’s orders.
“The respondents could have been awarded jail terms until they refund Rs 2.59 lakh, but they escaped by settling the case and asking the complainant to withdraw her complaint,” they said.
WHAT FORUM SAID
* Builders to deposit Rs 30,000 with ‘Consumers’ Legal Aid Fund’
* They caused a 4-year delay in complying with commission’s orders
* Time wasted could have been utilized for other needy customers
* Compromise made with ulterior motive to avoid punishment
* They could have been awarded jail term until they refund amount
* They can’t be given liberty to fulfill order according to their whims & fancies
* If happens, importance/seriousness of commission’s orders will be lost
* Possibility of accused again violating court orders can’t be denied
* Such tendency may increase if strict punishment not meted out
* Strict action necessary to stop attitude to defy judicial orders