By: Ravi Sinha
Track2Realty Exclusive
Backed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) penalty of Rs 630 crore on DLF, for “unfair trade practices” and “abuse of market dominance”, the Belaire Owners’ Association has suddenly become self-styled crusaders against developers. They are openly advising several residents’ welfare associations (RWAs) from Gurgaon to Greater Noida how to resolve their flat-related problems.
The CCI order was based on a complaint filed by the Belaire Owners’ Association with the competition watchdog. The moot point, however, is whether a judgement passed by a quasi-judicial body empowers a group of victims to suddenly emerge as consumer courts overnight?
Qubrex, the real estate consultancy firm that presented an expert report to the CCI on the market share of DLF to establish its dominance in Gurgaon, has also got its hands full, with various buyers seeking its help against developers.
Even more important question is what happens to those cases which cannot come under the CCI domain? The argument made by the Commission on common clauses might strengthen their respective cases in consumer courts.
According to the complaint in the Belaire case, DLF had promised to complete the high-end residential project by 2009. But more than two years later, buyers are yet to get possession. Also, DLF increased the number of floors, increasing the number of apartments to 564 from 384.
According to the builder-buyer agreement in the Belaire case: “The company reserves the right to correct, modify, amend or change all the annexures attached to this agreement, and also annexures which are indicated to be tentative… as deemed necessary by the company at its sole discretion.”
DLF, in its defence, had told the CCI that the allottees had signed the agreement and the practice adopted by DLF was a general industry practice. However, CCI refuted it by pointing out that in an agreement, both parties should be of equal footing with the same bargaining power.
CCI said, “If one party to the agreement has no choice, the other party cannot take advantage only because there is a signed agreement between the parties.”
Sources in DLF said the Belaire Owners’ Association comprised 20-25 persons who defaulted after the first installment in 2007 and had not paid since. A buyer said people stopped payment since DLF had made the payment construction linked, and no construction was happening. Another buyer said many had made 95 per cent of the payment.
DLF is now planning to move the Competition Appellate Tribunal. However, till the time the final verdict is out Belaire Owners’ Association is playing the role of a virtual consumer court.
