According to the court, even though CHS has a panel, the builder is responsible for shoddy construction.

A session’s court decided in favour of a Bhandup CHS and affirmed a lower court judgment on a complaint against the builder for inadequate building, observing that simply because a society’s operations are handled by committee members, a builder cannot exonerate himself in case of bad construction.

The magistrate had properly noted, according to the session’s court, that there was a prima facie case to establish carelessness on the part of the constructor, which may jeopardize human life and personal safety. “It is apparent from the images that nets are used to protect people and property from harm. The plaster is flaking off owing to debonding in the block, which is a construction-related issue, not wear and tear, according to the report.

Devdarshan CHS filed a complaint with the magistrate court in 2018 saying that a section of the seven-year-old structure was on the verge of collapse. It highlighted two incidents in 2017 in which pieces of plaster from two balconies fell. It said that two automobiles were destroyed and that the damages totalled Rs 2.15 lakh. The group went on to say that audit reports performed by a reputable business and an expert revealed massive fractures, leakage, and seepage that could be seen with the naked eye.

The magistrate’s court-filed proceedings against City Estate Developers Ltd, its directors, and four individuals last year. The complaint was made by the chairman of the CHS, who stated that the builder had constructed the residential-cum commercial building, which consisted of 108 flats, and that the purchasers had been dwelling in the property since 2011.

According to the organization, the builder was obligated to create and register a society but had failed to do so. It was said that the construction was subpar because the materials utilized were of poor quality. In addition, a complaint has been filed with the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

The complaint was made under provisions of the Indian Penal Code dealing with threatening the life or personal safety of others, as well as common purpose. The maximum punishment under the offence is three months in jail or a fine of up to Rs 250, or both.

The builder and officials, on the other hand, rejected the claims, stating that the building had been maintained by the inhabitants and their committee since 2014, and so they were responsible for upkeep. They said the lawsuit was filed to harass and extort money from them.