BEFORE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD
C.C.NO.73 OF 2012
Between:
Smt
4th
1. Andhra Pradesh Rajiv A company registered under the Companies Act
Secretariat Complex, 1-2-386,
2. State Bank of India
Near
Counsel for the complainant Counsel for the opposite parties
QUORUM:
SRI THOTA ASHOK KUMAR, HON’BLE MEMBER
FRIDAY THE TWENTY FIRST
Oral Order (As per Sri 1. `9,54,910/- with interest @ 24% per annum, a sum of`9,85,286/- towards loan on the flat payable to the opposite party no.2 bank and an amount of`5`30,000/-.
2. `15,000/- per month in the year,2007 applied for allotment of flat measuring 685`15,000/- and submitted relevant documents. The sale consideration of the flat is`10`2`2,57,500/- on 10.03.2008 and 18.07.2008.
3. `1,90,000/- on the premise that the cost of the house is`12,20,000/- and the amount was demanded to be paid on or before 20.11.2009 with a grace period of 15 days to pay the amount with interest @18% p.a. The first opposite party demanded the complainant to pay a sum of`75,000/- towards covered car parking area or an amount of`20,000/- towards uncovered car parking area.
4. `20,000/- on 4.02.2012 towards uncovered car parking area and the amount of`95,000/- on 14.02.2012 and requested the first opposite party to execute sale deed. The first opposite party informed her that they sold the flat to
5. `7,72,500/- with interest to the opposite partyno.2-bank.
6.
7. `7`10,30,000/-. The price was tentative and subject to change upon the actualinputs and costing. It is not possible to give actual costing at the time issuing notification. Gated community in order to have disturbance free atmosphere was provided as additional facility. By the time of draw of lots, final cost of the house was fixed at Rs.12.20 lakh. The`12
8. `2`2`2,57,000/- had to be paid in nine months therefrom.
9. `95,000/- on 14.02.2012 on account of fresh demand from the opposite party no.1.
10. `95,000/- to the complainant. The first opposite party refunded the amount of`9
11.
12. `7,92,000/- in favour of the complainant to the opposite party no.1. `9 `48,190/- as on 28.8.2012 to the opposite party no.2.
13.
14.
1. Whether the complainant committed default in paying the installments to the first opposite party?
2. Whether the cancellation of allotment of the flat is arbitrary?
3. To what relief?
15. `7.00 lakh and`10.30 respectively. The flats would be allotted as by way of draw of lots among the applicants.
16. `15,000/- on 15.03.`10`2
17.
1. 2. rd
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
18. `2,57,000/- each on 10.03.2008 and
19.
20
21.
“--- to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of Mandamus a) Declaring the unilateral decision of the 3rdththththrd rd
22. `70,000/- for 2BHK and a sum of Rs.35
“24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
23.
24. `7,92,000/- was sanctioned
The
25. `2
26.
27. `1
28. `20,000/- towards uncovered car parking space on 4.2.2010 and Rs.95,000/- through `95,000/- paid by the complainant towards balance sale consideration. The opposite party no.1 refunded the amount of`9 `10 29. `20,000/- towards uncovered car parking area and the balance sale consideration of`95,000/- in the month of February 2012 without informing the opposite `95,000/- paid by the complainant towards balance sale consideration. `9,00,313/- to the opposite party no.2 bank.
30. `9,00,313/- out of the amount of`10,30,000/- paid by the complainant towards sale consideration of the flat, on the premise that it has deducted and retained 10% of the amount received from the complainant.
31. `5 lakh as compensation besides interest @ 24% on the loan amount.
1. th
2.
3.
32.
33.
34. `25,000/- towards compensation.
35. `1`25,000/- towards compensation and costs of`5000/-.
కె.ఎం.కె.*
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
For complainant
EXHIBITS MARKED
For complainant
Ex. A1
Ex. A2
Ex. A3
Ex. A4
Ex. A5
Ex. A6 Ex.A7
Ex.A8 Ex.A9
Ex.A10
Ex.A11
Ex.A12
Ex.A13
Ex.A14
Ex.A15
For opposite parties
Ex.B1
Ex.B2
Ex.B3
|
[HONABLE MR. SRI R. LAXMI NARASIMHA RAO] |
PRESIDING MEMBER |
|
[HONABLE MR. T.Ashok Kumar] |
MEMBER |