MUMBAI: The sessions court on Monday refused to grant anticipatory bail to 59-year-old builder who was apprehensive that he will be arrested for allegedly cheating a mother-daughter duo by selling them two flats in 2017 but failed to give possession of the premises. A police complainnt has been filed at the Mahim Police Station by complaint lodged by Mahlaqa Mohammad Farooque Riyami, her son, Umar and daughter Huda.
The errant builder has been identified as Mohammad Kalim Shaikh (59).
Meanwhile, the court refused to accept the claim of the police that it is a case of civil dispute. The Mahim police has still not registered an FIR against Shaikh, even when the mother-daughter’s application is pending since January 23.
“The way in which the applicant (Shaikh) cheated the complainant is the best example how builders in Mumbai cheat innocent people like the complainant and her daughter,” the court said.
“Believing such inducement with dishonest intention the innocent people like the complainant and her daughter handover their hard earned life earnings and ultimately get cheated. In my opinion such complaint application cannot be treated as civil dispute,” said the court while discarding the stand taken by the police that the dispute between the builder and the flat buyers was of civil nature.
As per the complaint lodged by Mahlaqa Mohammad Farooque Riyami, her son, Umar and daughter Huda, who works in Dubai, Shaikh constructed Mumtaj Mahal building near China Temple in Mazgaon.
She claimed that in 2017, Shaikh told Riyami that he has got excess floor space index and therefore, the complainant purchased room No.801 from him, but the registration thereof was not done till date.
Meanwhile, Huda too, was willing to buy a house in the same building and approached Shaikh, who offered to sell flat no 902 on the ninth floor of the proposed building. Accordingly, Huda arranged money and paid ₹60 lakh at that time. Later, on Shaikh’s demand they paid ₹10 lakh more to him.
However, it came to their notice that Shaikh had not constructed the ninth floor at all. When the complainant demanded their money back, Shaikh refused.
Meanwhile, Huda’s husband died in Dubai due to heart attack in 2020 and therefore Shaikh offered flat no 802 to Huda to stay in till the ninth floor was constructed.
A year later, in 2021, Shaikh asked Huda to vacate the flat, as it was to be given to Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) and threatened that if the complainant refused to leave the premises, she would end up in jail. He also promised to hand over the flat on the ninth floor once it was constructed.
Relying on his assurance, the family vacated the eighth floor flat after which Shaikh executed an agreement with the complainants in December 2021 as regards the two flats and gave them post-dated cheques.
A year later, the mother-daughter duo tried encashing the cheques, which bounced. Therefore, on January 23, the mother filed a written complaint with the Mahim police station against Shaikh. The police, however, have still not registered an FIR and are still conducting preliminary investigation.
The court dismissed the builder’s plea after hearing both the sides.“Careful perusal of recitals made in the agreement dated December 20, 2021 clearly indicates how the applicant gave assurance for flats No.802 and 902 to the complainant and her daughter, when he himself was knowing well that flat No.802 cannot be sold due to the claim of MHADA and there could not be any agreement in respect of Flat No.902 when the said scheme was not permitted to construct 9th floor,” said the court.
“Knowing well these facts, the applicant appears to have induced the complainant and her daughter to enter into an agreement in respect of those two flats and also induced them to pay him sumptuous money for the consideration,” added the court.