An important step forward has been taken: after a 14-year delay, the Suburban Mumbai District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission has decided to accept a complaint against developers Shabir Shaikh and Ravikant Mishra.
A Malad resident named Maria D’Silva filed the lawsuit, alleging that the developers in a 2010 reconstruction project had broken their contract. The decision made by the commission was predicated on the notion of “persistent breach of contract” because the developers had not yet received an Occupational Certificate (OC) from the Municipal Corporation.
Maria D’Silva was residing in a rented home that her landlord had agreed to have renovated by the developers. In accordance with the terms of the 2010 agreement, the developers gave D’Silva a 390 square foot unit in the rebuilt building in exchange for an 18-month rent payment of Rs 4,000 and a security deposit of Rs 40,000.
Even though the “Celebration Apartment” building is complete, the developers only paid a portion of the agreed-upon amount of Rs 1,62,000, and the complainant claims that they were never handed possession of the promised apartment.
Representing D’Silva, Advocate J. Dave contended that the developers were still in arrears, amounting to Rs 9,09,954, and that the developers’ failure to provide the OC constituted an ongoing breach of the contract. The 14-year delay was first noted by the commission as being past the statute of limitations.
Using several Supreme Court decisions, notably the seminal decision in *Samruddhi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. vs. Mumbai Mahalaxmi Construction Pvt. Ltd.*, Dave successfully argued that the case falls under the “continuous cause of action” doctrine and that limitation laws are therefore inapplicable in the absence of an OC.
Source: The Free Press Journal
