A. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : AT HYDERABAD

c. c.45/2012

Between :

Sri R. B. M. Krishna

S/o late Rangaineni Subba Rao

Aged 42 years, occ ; Business

R/o 38-12/5, Vinoba Nagar, Sainikpuri,

Secunderabad – 500 094                           

And

1. Lanco Hills Technology Park Pvt. Ltd

Rep. by its Director Mr. V. Srinivas

S/o V. Hanumantha Naidu, aged 47 years,

#565, Phase -111, Road no. 92,

Jubilee Hills,

2. Bank of Baroda

Rep by its Branch Manager,

Malkajgiri, Hyderabad

Counsel for the Complainant

Counsel for the Opposite parties

Coram                                  

And

Tuesday, the Twenty Third Day ofTwo Thousand Thirteen

****

01.This is a complaint filed   and

2.           The brief facts of the complaint

The complainant is a proprietor of M/s. Hyderabad Timbers having Depot at Sainikpuri, Secunderabad. The OP. 1 Private Limited company is the SPV formed for the project which has entered into a Development Agreement dated 04.11.2006 with APIIC and Lanco Infratech Limited and the said agreement specifies the site where the development is to take pale, proposed development on the land, payment of consideration, phases in which the development will be madend

Having attracted with the advertisement and publicity etc., made by the opposite party No.1,  flat/Apartment bearing No. 2104, Floor 21^st     

3.          

There is no dispute as regards the development undertaken by OP1 and loan sanctioned by OP.2 in favour of the complainant in accordance with the terms of the agreement as entered into between the parties. So also with regard to execution of agreement and the willingness of the st  with exemplary costs.

04.      

OP 2 sanctioned housing loan with a limit of Rs.61.20 lakhs to the complainant for the purchase of flat from OP.1 which is costing Rs.1,23,23,405/-. The complainant having executed a loan agreement on   

 4.        

5.    

6.           

(i)  

7.         The plea of Op.1    , entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of a personal service, In several decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and National Commission it was held that the development of the flat for the purpose of selling it as flats and house sites and to construct the residential flats after duly adding the value by way of providing infrastructure obtaining lay outs and other permission from the local Government etc constitute by itself a kind of service and that in view of the matter, when the person purchases the plots or flats from the developer , he/she as the case may be is not only purchases the same, but also the services associated with it. In view of the said definition, the complainant undoubtedly is entitled to file the instant consumer complaint and therefore the Consumer Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and thus the point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant and against the OP.1.

08.      

The case of thest    nd          together with 12% interest PA from the dates of respective payments till date of realization but not 24% PA interest as it is very much exorbitant so also costs of Rs.5,000/-.       along with interest and penal charges if any as mentioned in the loan agreement, failing which, OP. 2 bank is at liberty to collect and credit the same to the loan Account of the complainant. Thus points    

10.      

(i)          

(ii)        

                                                           MEMBER                      

CC No. 45/2012

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS 

For the complainants

Ex. A1      

Ex. A2      

Ex. A3      

Ex. A4      

Ex. A5      Baroda

Ex. A6      Ex. A7      

Ex. A8      Ex.A9       Ex.A10      

Ex.A11      

Opposite parties