STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION OF TELANGANA:  AT HYDERABAD

C.C.NO.166 OF 2014

Between

1. Sri P.V.Manohar S/o late P.V.Sarma
   Aged about 53 years, Occ: Business

2.  Smt P.Vardhani W/o P.V. Manohar
Aged about 46 years, Occ: Service

(Both R/o Flat No.302, Legend-1 Apartment

Gaganmahal Colony, Domalguda, Hyderabad-29

                                                                                  …Complainants

     A N D

1.  M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd.,
   Rep. by its Director Sri Hari Challa
   Sy.Nos.384, 385 & 426/A,
   Space Station, Tellapur
   Hyderabad-502 032

2. M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd.,

Rep. by its Associate Vice President
Mr.A.Appa Rao S/o Subbaiah
R/o Flat No.911, Teja Block
My Home Nawadweepa Apartments
Madhapur, Hyderabad

3. Sri Hari Challa
   Director of M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd.,

R/o Plot No.90, Teja Block
My Home Nawadweepa Apartments,
Madhapur, Hyderabad-81

                                                                             …Opposite parties

C.C.NO.183 OF 2014

Between

Mr. Antoney Vincent S/o Mr.Vincent Stanisliaus,
Aged about 32 years, Occ: Operations Manager,
IBM India Pvt Ltrd., Present Address: Flat No.601,
South Block Ventaka Sai Nilayam
KPHB Phase-2, Kukatpally
Hyderabad-500 072

                                                                                  …Complainant

     A N D

1. M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
   a Company registered under
   Indian Companies Act, 1956
   Rep. by its Managing Director &
   Joint Managing Director: Sri Hari Challa
   S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary & Mr.C.Venkat Prasanna
   O/o Flat No.910, Teja Block, My Home Navadeepa
   Apartments,  Madhapur, Near Hi-tech City

Hyderabad-500 081

2. Sri Hari Challa S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   Managing Director  M/s Aliens Developers(P) Ltd.,

O/o Plot No.910, Teja Block
My Home Navadeepa Apartments,
Madhapur, Near Hi-Tech City;
Hyderabad-500 081

3. Mr.C.Venkat Prasanna S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   Joint Managing Director M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
   O/o Flat No.910, Teja Block, My Home Navadeepa Apartments
   Madhapur, Near Hi-Tech City
   Hyderabad-500 081

                                                                             …Opposite parties

C.C.NO.233 OF 2014

Between

1. Smt S.Neeraja W/o Dr.S.Mallikarjun
   Aged about 45 years, Occ: Housewife
   R/o H.No.16-2-147/38/1, Anandnagar
   Malakpet, Hyderabad-36

2.  Dr.S.Mallikarjun S/o Eswaraiah
Aged about 46 years, Occ: Doctor
R/o H.No.16-2-147/38/1,
Anandnagar, Malakpet
Hyderabad-36

                                                                                  …Complainants

     A N D

1. M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd.,
   Rep. by its Managing Director
   Corporate Office
   Gachi Bowli, Tellapur
   Hyderabad-502 032

2. Mr. Hari Challa
   Managing Director
   M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd.,
   Gachi Bowli, Tellapur,
   Patancheru Mandal
   Hyderabad-502 032
3. Mr.Venkata Prasanna Challa
   Joint Managing Director
   M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd.,
   GachiBowli, Tellapur
   Patancheru Mandal
   Hyderabad-502 032

                                                                             …Opposite parties

C.C.NO.309 OF 2014

Between

Sri Prakash Kumar Roy S/o Anadi Charan Rao
Aged about 44 years, Occ: Pvt Service
R/o H.No.13-6-433/51, Netaji Nagar Colony
PO: Golconda, Hyderabad-500 008

                                                                                  …Complainant

     A N D

1. M/s Aliens Developers Private Ltd.,
   Rep. by N.Ashok Kumar S/o M.Nageshwer Rao
   (Assistant Manager) & mr.Ravi Murali Krishna
   S/o M.Ramesh Ravi, Manager (Finance & Accounts)
   Office at Flat No.911, Teja Block, My Home Nawadweepa
   Apartments, Madhapur, Hyderabad- 500 081

2. M/s Aliens Space Station
   Gachibowli, Tellapur
   Hyderabad-502032

                                                                             …Opposite parties

C.C.NO.324 OF 2014

Between

1. Dr.Ramesh Bandari S/o late B.Kistaiah
   Aged about 46 years, Occ: Doctor

2.  Dr.Anila Bandari W/o Dr.Ramesh Bandari
Aged about 45 years, Occ: Doctor

 (Both are R/o 18-202/3, Greenland Colony

  Shadnagar, Mahabubnagar District

                                                                                  …Complainants

     A N D

1. M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
   Rep. by its Managing Director &
   Joint Managing Director Mr.Hari Challa
   O/o Aliens Space Station, Tellapur
   Tellapur, Ramachandrapuram Mandal
   Medak District, Hyderabad
   Telangana State – 502 032

2. Mr Hari Challa S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   Managing Director M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
   O/o Aliens Space State, Tellapur
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal
   Medak District, Hyderabad
   Telangana State – 502 032

3. Mr.Venkat Prasanna Challa S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   Joint Managing Director M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
   O/o Aliens Space Station, Tellapur,
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak District
   Hyderabad, Telangana State – 502 032
4. Mr.N.Ashok Kumar S/o Mr.Nageswara Rao
   Asst. Manager (BD Finance) M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
   O/o Aliens Space Station, Tellapur
   Ramachandrdapuram Mandal, Medak District
   Hyderabad, Telangana State – 502 032

5. Mr.Ravi Murali Krishna S/o Mr.Ramesh Ravi
   Manager (Finance & Accounts) M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
   O/o Aliens Space station, Tellapur
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak District
   Hyderabad. Telangana State -502032

(OP No.1 is represented by Ops No.2 & 3)

                                                                             …Opposite parties

C.C.NO.335 OF 2014

Between

Mr.K.N.Krishna Chaitanya S/o Mr.Nageshanna
Aged 29 years, Occ: Senior Engineer, CAE
R/o Flat NO.201, Plot No.103-107, Shilpa Gems
Prasanth Nagar, Miyapur, Hyderabad

                                                                                  …Complainants

     A N D

1. M/s Aliens Developers Private Ltd.,
   Off: at Flat No.911, Teja Block
   My Home Navadweepa Apartments
   Madhapur, Hyderabad-500081,
   Rep. by its Chairman cum Managing Director
    

2. Mr.Alaparthi Apparao S/o Sri Subbaiah
   aged about 32 years, Associate Vice President
   M/s Aliens Developers Private Limited
   Off: at flat No.911, Teja Block,
   My Home Navadweepa Apartments, Madhapur
   Hyderabad-500081

3. Mr.P.Pandu Ranga Rao S/o Sri P.Ekambaeswara Rao
   Aged about 41 years, Assistant Manager (Finance & Accounts)
   M/s Aliens Developers Private Limited, off: at Flat NO.911
   Teja Block, My Home Navadweepa Apartments
   Madhapur, Hyderabad-500 081

                                                                             …Opposite parties

C.C.NO.43 OF 2015

Between

Mr.Srikanth Sandru S/o S.Bhaskara Lingam
aged about 34 years, Occ: Technical Consultant
R/o H.No.8-1-84, Old Beet Bazar
Warangal, Telangana State

                                                                                  …Complainant

     A N D

1. M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd.,
   Rep. by its  Managing Director and
   Joint Managing Director
   O/o Flat No.911, Teja Block
   My Home Navadeepa Apartments
   Madhapur, Near Hi-Tech City
   Hyderabad-500081,
    
2. Mr.Hari Challa S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   Managing Director M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
   O/o Flat No.911, Teja Block
   My Home Navadeepa Apartments
   Madhapur, Near Hi-Tech City
   Hyderabad-500081,
    
3. Mr.Venkat Prasanna Challa S/o Mr.CVR Chowdary
   Joint Managing Director M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,

O/o at Plot No.911, Teja Block
My Home Nawadeepa Apartments,
Madhapur, Near HI-Tech City
Hyderabad-500 081

(Present addresses of Ops No.1 to 3
Aliens Space Station, Tellapur
Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak Dist.
Hyderabad (Telangana-502032)

                                                                             …Opposite parties

C.C.NO.72 OF 2015

Between

1. Mr.Balasubramanian Prakash
   S/o G.Balasubramanian Aged about 33 yrs
   Occ: Employee R/o Flat No.303, Block A-12
   Sanskruti Township, Uppal
   Hyderabad-500 088

2. Mrs Vidya Prakash W/o Balasubramanian Prakash
   Aged about 29 years, Occ: Housewife R/o Flat NO.303
   Block a-12, Sanskruti Township, Uppal
   Hyderabad-500 088

                                                                                  …Complainant

     A N D

M/s Aliens Developers Private Limited
rep. by Hari Challa/Venkat Challa
Aged about 26 years, Plot No.56 & 57
Vittal Rao Nagar, Madhapur
Hyderabad-81, Telangana

                                                                             …Opposite party

C.C.NO.99 OF 2015

Between

 Smt T.Pannaga Veny W/o T.Bala Bhaskar Rao
Aged 42 yrs, Occ: Housewife, R/o Flat No.401
Brundavan Homes, Palakloor Road, Gujjanagudla
Guntur District

                                                                                  …Complainant

     A N D

1. M/s Aliens Developers Private Ltd.,

Rep. by its   Managing Director and
Joint Managing Direcotr at Aliens Space Station
Tellapur, Ramachandrapuram Mandal
Medak District 5023032

2. Mr.Hari Challa S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   Major, Occ: Business, Managing Director
   of Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd., at
   Aliens Space Station, Tellapur,
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal
   Medak District-502032

3. Mr.Venkak Prasanna Challa S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   Major, Occ: Business, Joint Managing Director of
   M/s Aliens Space Station, Tellapur
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal
   Medak District-502032
    

4. Mr.A Apparao S/o Sri Subbaiah
   Major, Associate Vice President of
   M/s Aliens Developers Private Limited
   At Aliens Space Station, Tellapur,
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal,
   Medak District-502032. 

5. Mr.P.Pandu Ranga Rao S/o Sri P.Ekambaeswara Rao
   Major, Asst. Manager (Finance & Accounts)
   of M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd., at
   Aliens Space Station, Tellapur
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal,
   Medak District- 502302

                                                                             …Opposite parties

C.C.NO.182 OF 2015

Between

Vemula Sridhar S/o Venkateswara Rao
Aged about 41 years, Occ: Software Engineer
R/o Plot No.3, Reddy Colony Extension
Near Sagar Ring Road, Bairamalguda,
Ranga Reddy District, Presently R/o Flat No.10
Wellmead, Wellwood Road, Goodmayes, Ilford, Essex
1G38TX, United Kingdom, rep. by Munugoti Sudhakar
S/o late Nagabhushanam, aged about 59 years,
Occ: Business R/o H.No.1-1-780, Siddarthanagar
Kazipet, Warangal-506 004

                                                                                  …Complainant

     A N D

1. M/s Aliens Developers Pvt Ltd.,
   Rep. by its  Managing Director and
   Joint Managing Director Mr.Harichalla
   S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   O/o Aliens Space Station, Tellapur
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal
   Medak District, Hyderabad 

2. Mr.Hari Challa S/o Mr.CVR Chowdhary
   Joint Managing Director M/s aliens Develpers (P) Ltd.,
   O/o Aliens Space Station, Tellapur
   Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak Dist.
   Hyderabad – 502032

3. Mr.Venkat Prasanna S/o Mr.CVR Chowdary
   Joint Managing Director M/s Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,

O/o at Aliens Space Station
Tellapur, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak Dist
Hyderabad – 502032 

Counsel for the Complainants : Sri U.Venkateshwara Rao, Sri A.Naveen Kumar,
                                                  M/s Gopi Rajesh & Associates, Sri MSS Reddy,
                                                  Sri M.Thirumal Rao, Sri MRB Manikandan,    
                                                  Sri D.Raji Reddy, Sri C.Rakee Sridharan,            
                                                  Sri   K.Narayana Rao, Sri Smt A.Satyavathi. 

Counsel for the Opp. parties    : M/s  P.Raja Sripathi Rao

QUORUM             :

 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO, PRESIDENT

&

SRI PATIL VITHAL RAO, MEMBER

THURSDAY,  THE NINETH DAY OF FEBRUARY

TWO THOUSAND SEVENTEEN

Oral Order : (per Hon’ble Sri Justice B.N.Rao Nalla, Hon’ble President)

***

                    The complaints arise out of identical facts and similar circumstances, as such, they are disposed of by common order.  The complaint, CC No.166/2014 is taken as lead case.

2.                 The case of the Complainants in brief, is that the Opposite party No.1 company represented to them that they are engaged in the business of constructing multistoried apartments and entered into development agreement with the owners of the land comprised in survey nos. 384, 385 and 426/A situate at Tellapur village, Ramchandrapur Mandal, Medak district to construct high rise apartments under the name and style of ‘Aliens Space Station-I’ and obtained permission bearing No.HUDA/621/P4/PLG/HMDA(HUDA)/2008 and they would provide all amenities there for, possession by certain period of time as detailed in the table below with a grace period and on such representation of the opposite parties, the complainants  entered into agreement of sale for purchase of flats, having super built-up area with one car parking along with undivided share of land, the details of which are shown in the table below.

3.                 The complainants entered into agreements of sale in respect of flats at Aliens Space Station, situate at Tellapur village, Ramachandrapuram mandal, Medak district for the consideration thereof as detailed in the table below:

4.                 The Opposite parties had not commenced construction of the flats even after the stipulated period is expired and there is no possibility of the construction of the flats as also the Opposite parties had not responded to the repeated requests of the Complainants.  The Complainants had sought for return of the amount with interest, compensation and costs of the complaint, in each case, as detailed below.

5.                 The opposite parties no.1 to 3 resisted the claim on the premise that the complaint alleging deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties relating to the sale transaction entered into between the parties is not maintainable either under law and also in view of the facts of the case and hence liable to be dismissed in limine and also in view of the fact that the Complainants did not approach them before filing the complaint either for refund of money or for cancellation or with any request, hence, cannot attribute any deficiency of service, hence, does not fall under the purview of the C.P. Act.

6.                 The opposite parties submitted that on their application for conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural land and FTL clearance, permission was granted for conversion of agricultural land into non-agricultural land on 14.04.2007 and FTL clearance was granted on 30.12.2006 and thereafter HUDA earmarked the land as agricultural zone and the opposite patties have filed application for change of use of the land as commercial use zone. The Municipal Administration and Urban Development (I) Department notified the land in survey number 384 as residential use zone. The project could not be commenced in view of proposed road under Master Plan, until realignment of the proposed road without affecting the land in survey number 384 is made. Realignment of the proposed road was approved on 03.04.2008 and the permission was accorded approving the building plan on 11.04.2008. The opposite parties have obtained NOC from the AP Fire Services Department on 15.12.2007 and permission was granted in respect of the building with height of 90.40 meters. The opposite parties obtained NOC from Airport Authority on 10.07.2009.

7.                 The opposite parties have submitted that HUDA accorded technical approval on 14.10.2009 for ground + 20 upper floors and release of building permission up to 29 floors is awaited. The opposite parties have taken all necessary steps to complete the project at the earliest and the project being massive and due to the reasons beyond the control of the opposite parties, the opposite parties could not complete the project within the time frame. The opposite parties informed the complainants about the delay in completion of the project due to delay in clearance from the authorities concerned. In view of arbitration clause, the complaint is not maintainable before this Commission.

8.                 The opposite parties submitted that the opposite parties agreed to pay Rs.3/- per sqft in terms of Clause VIII (g) of the Agreement for the delay caused in completing the project and adjust the amount towards dues payable by the complainants. Though the delay occurred for completion of the project is beyond the control of the opposite parties, the opposite parties to maintain goodwill and relationship with the customers, willing to pay the compensation at agreed rate.  But the Complainants filed the present complaints with an ulterior motive to defame and to gain.  The complainants are put to strict proof of the payments made by producing the relevant receipts.  The complainants have to pay admittedly the balance consideration and other charges, therefore, unless the complainants pay the balance consideration, asking for delivery of flat is illegal and arbitrary. 

9.                 The reasons for delay is project required clearance from statutory bodies which are necessary for execution of the project. The said fact was informed to the Complainant sand even mentioned in the agreement of sale under clause No.XIV and described as “force majeure”.  The Complainants who paid the part of sale consideration want to take back the investment from Hyderabad due to the changed circumstances in Hyderabad market after bifurcation of the State, thereby sought for refund of the amount.  As there is some delay on the part of the Ops in delivering the flat, the complainant taken advantage of the same and filed the present complaint to avoid cancellation charges.  The complaint is not within the limitation as time prescribed under Section 24A of the C.P. Act, hence not maintainable.  The complainants are not entitled for refund of amount and interest thereon and any compensation and costs.  There is no cause of action for the present complaint.  If the complainants want to take refund of the amount, the complainants shall forego 20% of the flat cost out of the amount paid towards cancellation charges as per the terms of agreement.  Hence prayed for dismissal of the complaints.

10.               During the course of enquiry, the Complainant no.1 got filed evidence affidavit on their behalf and also got marked the documents as exhibits A1 to A13.  On behalf of the opposite parties 1 to 3, the Managing Director of the Opposite party no.1 by name Hari Challa filed his affidavit and the documents, Ex.B1 to B18, in each case. 

11.               The counsel for the Complainants and the Opposite parties had advanced their arguments reiterating the contents of the complaint and the written version in addition to filing written arguments on behalf of Complainants.  Heard both sides.

12.               The points for consideration are :

i)        Whether the complaint is maintainable in view of arbitration clause in the agreement of sale ?

ii)       Whether the complaint is not a ‘consumer dispute’?

iii)      Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite parties?

iv)      To what relief ?

13.               POINT NO.1 :  The Complainants entered into “Agreement of Sale” with the Opposite parties for purchase of flats as detailed supra, for the consideration thereof and paid the amounts shown therein, proposed to be constructed by the Opposite parties, which are not in dispute.  The agreement of sale was entered into between the Complainants and the Opposite parties in respect of the above stated flats as detailed in the table supra.  Thereafter, the Complainants paid the part consideration amount as per the pricing pattern of the flat issued by the opposite parties on various dates. The agreement of sale provides for reference to arbitration.  The learned counsel for the opposite parties have contended that in view of the arbitration clause in the agreement, the Complainants cannot maintain the complaint before this Commission. 

14.               However, remedy provided under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy and in the light of law laid in “National Seeds Corporation Ltd., Vs. M.Madhusudhan Reddy reported in (2012) 2 SCC 506 wherein the maintainability of the complaint before consumer forum prior to the complainants having exhausted the other remedy was considered as under:

“The remedy of arbitration is not the only remedy available to a grower.  Rather, it is an optional remedy.  He can either seek reference to an arbitrator or file a complaint under the Consumer Act.  If the grower opts for the remedy of arbitration, then it may be possible to say that he cannot, subsequently, file complaint under the Consumer Act.  However, if he chooses to file a complaint in the first instance before the competent Consumer Forum, then he cannot be denied relief by invoking Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act.  Moreover, the plain language of Section 3 of the Consumer Act makes it clear that the remedy available in that Act is in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force.”

Thus, in view of the ratio laid in aforementioned decision, the consumer has two options, either to proceed for arbitration process or to invoke the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.  As such, it cannot be said that the complaint is not maintainable before this Commission in view of the arbitration clause in the agreement.  For the above reasons, the Point No.1 is answered in favour of the Complainants and against the Opposite parties.

15.               POINTS No.2 & 3 : The Opposite parties 1 to 3 entered into Development Agreement with the land owners of the land admeasuring Ac.19.26 guntas in survey numbers 384, 385 and 426/A situate at Tellapur village of Ramachandrapuram mandal, Medak district and they agreed to deliver the residential flat to the Complainants in accordance with the terms and conditions agreed upon and consented thereto and as per specifications given therein.  The Development Agreement is not merely an agreement and in fact, it is “Development Agreement-cum-Power of Attorney”. 

16.               In pursuance of the development agreement, the opposite parties have obtained permission for construction of the residential building on the land and admittedly there has been abnormal delay in completion of the project in so far as these complaints are concerned.  The opposite parties have attributed the delay to the authorities concerned in granting permission and No Objection Certificate, bifurcation of the State etc., as to the cause for delay in completion of the project.  The opposite parties would contend that the cause for delay is beyond their control which is ‘force majeure’. 

17.               The force majeure clause in the Agreement of sale does not include within its ambit the delay caused in granting permission, NOC etc.  The Opposite parties failed to explain how they could take shelter under the cover of “force majeure”. We may state that the delay caused in obtaining permission or NOC etc., cannot be considered as ‘force majeure’.  It is quite not understandable how the bifurcation of State can be attributed to be cause for delay in completion of the project.  The opposite parties ought to have informed the complainants about the delay likely to be caused in obtaining the permission which they failed to.  For that matter, the Opposite parties cannot receive any sale consideration from any person in respect of any flat unless they have obtained permission from HUDA or HMDA. 

18.               The complainants have submitted that owing to failure of the opposite parties in completing the construction of the subject flats, they opted for cancellation of the agreement of sale of flats and the opposite parties have contended that in order to maintain cordial relations with the complainants, they agreed to pay compensation in terms of the agreement which they entered into in normal course with other customers.  The complainants got issued a notice to the Opposite parties through their counsel setting forth series of events of delay and negligence and false promises made by the Opposite parties seeking for refund of the amount on the premise of inaction on the part of the opposite parties.

19.               The opposite parties have promised to complete construction of the flat and hand over its possession to the complainant(s) within the stipulated time therein with a grace period of six/nine months as agreed and on their failure to perform their part of contract, the opposite parties have proposed to pay rents but failed to pay the same.  However, there is no communication from the side of the opposite parties in this regard and the opposite parties have not filed a piece of paper to show their readiness to pay compensation and adjust the same towards the dues payable by the complainants.  Having received the part sale consideration amount, the Opposite parties kept with them without commencing the construction work of the building.

20.               Not keeping-up promise to complete construction of the building and failure to deliver possession of the flat constitutes deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  The complainants have two options left for recovery of the amount, either by filing suit in court of law or by way of filing complaint before State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in view of the amount claimed falling within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this commission.  The contention of the opposite parties that the complaint is not maintainable is not sustainable. 

21.               The Opposite parties can only receive such amount of sale consideration which would be in accordance with the payment schedule and correspond to the stage of construction of the flats.  However, the Opposite parties had received the sale consideration in excess of what was to be received from the complainants particularly the construction of the building was not yet commenced.  Not keeping-up the promise to complete construction of the building and failure to deliver possession of the flat as also not keeping-up promise to refund the amount as per the terms of the repayment scheduler constitutes deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite parties.

22.               The complainants claimed refund of amount paid together with interest besides claim for damages.  The complainants cannot be said to have acquiesced to the delay in construction of the project.  Though the complainants have not disputed that the opposite parties have informed them about the cause for delay in obtaining permission and NOC etc., which does not disentitle them from claiming compensation.  The complainants are entitled to interest @ 12% p.a. on the amount paid from the date of complaint till realization.  For the reasons stated supra, the Points No.2 and 3 are answered in favour of the Complainants and against the Opposite parties.

23.               POINT No.4 : In the above facts and circumstances, the points 1 to 4 are answered accordingly holding that the Opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to refund the amount to the Complainants.

24.               In the result, the complaints are allowed holding the Opposite parties 1 to 3 jointly and severally liable to refund the amount paid by the Complainants.  In case, sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above direction. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

25.               It is very pertinent to mention here though an amount of Rs.24,40,000/- is claimed towards refund of the amount in CC No.309/2014 in the pleadings, however, no receipts there for are filed. 

CC NO.166/2014 :      

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties 1 to 3 to pay an amount of Rs.21,43,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.183/2014 :      

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties 1 to 3 to pay an amount of Rs.27,71,105/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.233/2014 :      

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties   to pay an amount of Rs.39,39,368/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.309/2014 :      

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties   to pay an amount of Rs.17,10,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.324/2014 :      

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties   to pay an amount of Rs.28,23,428/- (as per the receipts Ex.A5, A6, A7, A8, A9 and statement of Account, Exs.A12) with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainant shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.335/2014 :      

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties   to pay an amount of Rs.25,59,000/- (as per the receipts bearing Ex.A3, A4, A5, A6, A7 and email dated 13.09.2014 sent by the opposite parties)   with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.43/2015 :        

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties   to pay an amount of Rs.20,56,400/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.72/2015 :        

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties   to pay an amount of Rs.31,19,940/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainant shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.99/2015 :        

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties   to pay an amount of Rs.23,50,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

CC NO.182/2015 :      

(i)       The complaint is allowed directing the Opposite parties   to pay an amount of Rs.24,28,454/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of last payment till payment and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.5,000/-.  Time for compliance: four weeks.

ii)       In case sale deed was executed, the complainants shall re-convey the same to the developer on compliance of above directions. The registration charges and stamp duty etc., shall be borne by the developer OP No.1.

PRESIDENT                                      MEMBER

Dated : 09.02.2017

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

CC NO.166 OF 2014

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainants :                                                For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of P.V.Manohar                 Affidavit evidence of Hari Challa

Complainant No.1.                                                

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainants :

Ex.A1           Copy of the Agreement of Sale, dated 28.01.2011 executed by the Opposite parties in favour of the Complainants.

Ex.A2           Copy of the receipt bearing No.06334, dated 30.12.2010 for Rs.2,50,000/-

Ex.A3           Copy of the receipt bearing No.771, dated 23.01.2011 for Rs.8,68,000/-.

Ex.A4          Copy of the receipt bearing No.07818, dated 20.06.2011 for Rs.3,25,000/-

Ex.A5           Copy of the receipt bearing No.07233, dated 05.04.2011 for Rs.7,00,000/-

Ex.A6           O/c legal notice dt.08.03.2014 got issued by the Complainants to the  Opposite parties.

Ex.A7           Original postal receipts 

Ex.A8           Original returned covers

Ex.A9           Acknowledgement

Ex.A10         Legal notice dated 09.04.2014 got issued by the complainants to OPs

Ex.A11         Original Postal receipts

Ex.A12         Original returned postal covers

Ex.A13         Original postal Acknowledgement

CC NO.183 OF 2014

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainants :                                                For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of Antony Vincent             Affidavit evidence of Hari Challa -

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainants :

Ex.A1           Copy of Sale Deed dt.23.03.2011 executed by the Ops to complainant

Ex.A2           Copy of the receipt bearing No.03877 dated 16.09.2009 for Rs.4,95,000/-

Ex.A3           Copy of the receipt bearing No.07270, dated 30.03.2011 for Rs.2483435/-

Ex.A4           Copy of the receipt bearing No.03995, dated 11.10.2009 for Rs.2,00,000/-

Ex.A5           Copy of the receipt bearing No.07289, dated 03.03.2011 for Rs.2,80,80,025/-.

Ex.A6           Copy of Bank Statement from 01.04.2014 to 25.06.2014 of loan A/c

CC NO.233 OF 2014

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainant :                                        For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of S.Neeraja                      Affidavit evidence of Hari

Complainant No.1                                        Challa (on behalf of OPs)

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainant :

Ex.A1           Copy of the Agreement for Reservation of Flat dt.24.10.2008 executed by the Opposite parties in favour of the Complainants.

Ex.A2           Copy of the receipt bearing No.04548, dated 08.08.2009 for Rs.15,00,000/-.

Ex.A3           Copy of the receipt bearing No.03857, dated 26.08.2009 for Rs.9,39,887/-

Ex.A4           Copy of the receipt bearing No.05810, dated 19.08.2010 for Rs.7,50,000/-

Ex.A5           Copy of the receipt bearing No.273, dated 19.08.2010 for Rs.7,49,481/-

Ex.A6           Copy of annexure-B Space Station-1 specifications

Ex.A7           Copy of Agreement of Sale dated 24.08.2010 in between the complainant 
and the opposite parties

Ex.A8           Copy of letter dated 25.08.2010 addressed by the Ops to the complainant. 

Ex.A9           Legal Notice dated 15.07.2014 got issued by the complainant tot he opposite parties.  

Ex.A10         Original Postal Receipts

Ex.A11         Original returned postal cover 

CC NO.309 OF 2014

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainants :                                                For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of Prakash Kumar Roy       Affidavit evidence of Hari

                                                                   Challa (on behalf of Ops )

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainants :

Ex.A1           Copy of the Agreement of Sale, dated 18.10.2011 executed by the Opposite parties in favour of the Complainants.

Ex.A2          Copy of Tripartite Agreement between Ops, complainant and the Bank 

Ex.A3          Copy of the  letter dt.28.10.2011 addressed by Ops to the complainant

Ex.A4           Copy of  receipts  dt.01.11.2011, 03.11.2011, 03.12.2011 , 25.01.2012 and dt.28.10.2011 

Ex.A5           Copy of No Object Certificate issued by Ops to SBI

Ex.A6           Copy of Account Statement of the complainant with regard to his loan account.

Ex.A7           Notice dated 23.06.2014 issued by the  complainant to the Ops.  

Ex.A8           Copy of the legal notice got issued gby the complainant to the Ops dated  27.08.2014 

Ex.A9           Original Postal Receipts is Photostat copy of Certificate of Incorporation,  .

Ex.A10         Original Postal Acknowledgements 

Ex.A11         Original Postal acknowledgement

Ex.A12         Original returned postal cover

CC NO.324 OF 2014

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainant :                                        For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of  Ramesh Bandari          Affidavit evidence of Hari

Complainant no.1                                         Challa (on behalf of Ops )

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainant :

Ex.A1           Copy of the Agreement of Sale, dated 22.11.2012 executed by the Opposite parties in favour of the Complainants.

Ex.A2           Copy of calculation sheet of the opposite parties  

Ex.A3           Copy of calculation sheet of the opposite parties  

Ex.A4          Copy of letter dated 05.03.2010 addressed by the opposite party no.1 to the complainant no.1  

Ex.A5           Copy of receipt No.02736 dt.03.12.2008  for Rs.2,50,000/-

Ex.A6           Copy of receipt No.02950 dt.31.01.2009  for Rs.4,27,700/-

Ex.A7           Copy of receipt No.04201 dt.15.10.2009  for Rs.5,00,000/-

Ex.A8           Copy of receipt No.04349 dt.05.01.2010  for Rs.2,17,000/-

Ex.A9           Copy of receipt No.575 dt.05.03.2010 for Rs.2,50,000/-

Ex.A10         Copy of letter addressed by the Bank of India dt.18.12.2012 to the
          complainant

Ex.A11         Copy of Tripartite Agreement dt.19.12.2012 in between the Ops, 
          Complainant and the Bank   

Ex.A12         Copy of Bank Statement of the Bank of India .

Ex.A13         Copy interest certificate for the period from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2014

Ex.A14         Copy of legal notice dt.27.10.2014 got issued by the complainant to Ops.

Ex.A15         Copies of postal receipts

Ex.A16         Copies of postal acknowledgements

Ex.A17         Copies of face of returned postal covers  

Ex.A18         Personal notice dated 22.12.2015 to N.Ashok Kumar, Asst. Manager of
          opposite parties

Ex.A19         Personal notice  dated 22.12.2015 to Mr.Ravi Murali Krishna, Manager of 
          opposite parties

Ex.A20         Original Postal receipts

Ex.A21         Original returned postal cover sent to N.Ashok Kumar

Ex.A22         Oiriginal returned postal cover sent to Ravi Mural Krishna

Ex.A23         Paper publication  of notice in Nava Telangana dt.04.03.2016

CC NO.335 OF 2014

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainants :                                                For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of Krishna Chaitanya                  Affidavit evidence of Hari Challa                  

complainant                                                          as RW1 (on behalf of Ops  )

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainants :

Ex.A1           Copy of the Agreement of Sale, dated 05.08.2011 executed by the Opposite parties in favour of the Complainants.

Ex.A2           Copy of tripartite Agreement dt.17.08.2011 between Ops, complainant and the Bank

Ex.A3           Copy of the receipt bearing No.06349, dated 13.01.2011 for Rs.2,50,000/-

Ex.A4          Copy of the receipt bearing No.07118, dated 29.06.2011 for Rs.7,00,000/-

Ex.A5           Copy of the receipt bearing No.07085, dated 11.07.2011 for Rs.2,00,000/-

Ex.A6          Copy of  receipt bearing No.06999, dated 08.08.2011 for Rs.5,00,000/-

Ex.A7           Copy of  receipt bearing No.11066, dated 26.09.2012 for Rs.1,75,000/-

Ex.A8           Copy of Calculation sheet of the complainant issued by Ops

Ex.A9           Copy of email dated 13.09.2014 from the complainant

Ex.A10         Copy of the bank statement of the complainant

Ex.A11         Copy of email dated 02.12.2014 of the complainant

Ex.A12         Copy of email dated 24.03.2014 of the complainant

Ex.A13         Copy of refund schedule of the opposite parties

Ex.A14         Copy of letter dated 17.04.2014 Mr.K.Nagaeshanna to the Ops

Ex.A15         Copy of bounced cheque dt.27.05.2014 along with cheque bounce memo
                   dt.30.05.2014

Ex.A16         Copy of pay-in-slip for Rs.1,00,000/- dt.29.05.2014

Ex.A17         Copy of pay-in-slip for Rs.1,00,000/- dt.27.05.2014

Ex.A18         Copy of email dt.12.09.2014.

CC NO.43 OF 2015

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainants :                                                For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of  Srikanth Sandru          Affidavit evidence of Hari Challa                  

                                                                   as RW1 (on behalf of Ops  )

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainants :

Ex.A1           Copy of the Agreement of Sale, dated 27.03.2012 executed by the Opposite parties in favour of the Complainants.

Ex.A2           Copy of the receipt bearing No.09171 dt.31.12.2011 for Rs.3,00,000/-

Ex.A3           Copy of receipt bearing No.09567 dated 20.01.2012 for Rs.5,00,000/-

Ex.A4           Copy of receipt bearing No.09968 dated 24.03.2012 for Rs.5,00,000/-

Ex.A5           Copy of receipt bearing No.09969 dated 24.03.30212 for Rs.6,92,000/-

Ex.A6           Copy of receipt bearing No.11339 dated 10.11.2012 for Rs.64,400/-

Ex.A7           Legal notice dated 11.02.2015 got issued by the complainant to the
          opposite parties

Ex.A8           Original Postal acknowledgements

CC NO.72 OF 2015

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainant :                                        For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of Prakash                        Affidavit evidence of Hari

Balasubrahmanian                                                Challa (on behalf of Ops )

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainant :

Ex.A1           Copy of receipt bearing No.03560, dated 31.03.2009

Ex.A2           Copy of receipt bearing No.03151, dated 17.03.2009

Ex.A3           Copy of receipt bearing No.03319 dated 24.04.2009

Ex.A4           Copy of the Agreement of Sale  dated 20.03.2009 executed by the opposite
          parties in favour of the complainant 

Ex.A5           Copy of Certificate of Insurance

Ex.A6           Copy of payment plan of the complainant

Ex.A7           Copy of legal notice dated 09.06.2012 got issued by the Bank 

Ex.A8           Letter dated 27.11.2014 addressed by the complainant  to Ops

Ex.A9           Legal notice dated 03.12.2014 got issued by the complainant to Ops.

CC NO.99 OF 2015

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainants :                                                For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of T.Pannaga                     Affidavit evidence of Hari

Complainant                                                Challa (on behalf of Ops )

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainants :

Ex.A1           Copy of agreement of reservation dated 18.04.2011 between Opposite
          parties and complainant

Ex.A2          Copy of receipt bearing No.952, dated 17.04.2011 for Rs.15,00,000/-

Ex.A3           Copy of receipt bearing No.07754, dated 30.05.2011 for Rs.6,00,000/-

Ex.A4           Copy of receipt bearing No.07174, dated 27.02.2011 for Rs.1,50,000/-

Ex.A5           Copy of receipt bearing No.07212, dated 20.02.2011 for Rs.1,00,000/-

Ex.A6           Legal notice dated 02.04.2015 of issued by the complainant to the
          opposite parties

Ex.A7           Postal receipts and acknowledgements

Ex.A8           Original returned postal covers and postal receipts

CC NO.182  OF 2015

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainants :                                                For Opposite parties :

Affidavit evidence of Vemula Sridhar             Affidavit evidence of Hari

Complainant                                                Challa (on behalf of Ops )

EXHIBITS MARKED

For Complainants :

Ex.A1           Agreement of sale, dated 24.07.2008 executed by the Opposite parties in favour of the Complainant.

Ex.A2          Authorization letter dated 08.08.2015 of the complainant authorizing his
          father in law M.Sudhakar to represent the case 

Ex.A3           Legal notice dated 19.09.2015 got issued by the complainant to the
          opposite parties

Ex.A4           Original Postal Receipts

Ex.A5           Original Returned postal covers

Ex.A6           Original receipt bearing No.02809 dt.08.09.2008 for Rs.3,00,000/-

Ex.A7           Original receipt bearing No.02425 dt.05.08.2008 for Rs.12,28,454/-

Ex.A8           Original receipt bearing No.02349 dt. 02.08.2008 for Rs.1,85,000/-

Ex.A9           Original receipt bearing No.02615 dt.19.07.2008 for Rs.3,65,000/-

Ex.A10         Original receipt bearing No.02480 dt.12.07.2008 for Rs.1,00,000/-

Ex.A11         Original receipt bearing No.02324 dt.21.06.2008 for Rs.2,50,000/-

Ex.A12         Original Statement of Account of the complainant issued by Ops

Ex.A13         Original letter dated 18.12.2009 addressed by Ops to complainant

Ex.A14         Original letter from Kotak Mahinddra Bank dated 27.07.2015

Ex.A15         Statement of Bank account of the complainant. 

For Opposite parties (common in all cases) :

Ex.B1          Copy of Lr.No.252931/4/2007 addressed by Principal Secretary to Government to Vice, Chairman, HUDA, Hyderabad for change of land use.

Ex.B2          Copy of G.O.Ms.No.288, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (I1) Department, dated 03.04.2008 (HMDA revised master plan).

Ex.B3          Copy of (report) Lr.No.D1/3601/2007, dated 05.05.2007 addressed by District Collector, Medak to Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, HUDA along with map.

Ex.B4          Copy of minutes of meeting of multi-storeyed building committee for HUDA area held on 29.02.2008 at 3-00 pm in the chambers of Vice-Chairman, HUDA (4 basements + Ground + 13 Upper Floors).

Ex.B5          Copy of Lr.No.1927/Misc/Plg/H/2008, dated 31.03.2008 addressed by HUDA to the Principal Secretary to Government for 30 meters road alignment in Sy.No.384 & 385.

Ex.B6          Copy of Lr.No.621/P4/Plg/HUDA/2008, dated 11.04.2008 addressed by HUDA to OP No.1 approving 4 basements + Ground + 13 upper floors).

Ex.B7          Copy of Lr.No.621/Pr/Plg/HUDA/ 2008, dated 11.04.2008 addressed by HUDA to Executive Authority, Tellapur Gram Panchayat according technical permission of residential apartments.

Ex.B8          Copy of minutes of meeting of multi-storeyed building committee for MSB in HUDA area held on 05.06.2008 at the chambers of Vice-Chairman, HUDA (4 basements + ground + 29 upper floors).

Ex.B9          Copy of Lr.No.621/P4/Plg/HMDA/2008, dated 14.10.2009 addressed by HMDA to the Executive Authority, Tellapur Gram Panchayat according technical permission of residential apartments (4 basements + ground + 20 upper floors).

Ex.B10         Copy of Lr.No.SEIAA/AP/MDK-14/08, dated 12.08.2008 addressed by State Level Enviornment Impact Assessment Authority, Hyderabad to according environmental clearances to Opposite parties.

Ex.B11         Copy of Lr.No.19038/I1/2009, dated 24.11.2009 addressed by Principal Secretary to Government to Ops (clearance of GOMs.No.111).

Ex.B12         Copy of letter addressed by Opposite parties, dated 08.10.2010 to the HMDA, Hyd (revised application and plans for building permission consisting of 3 basement + ground + 29 upper floors).

Ex.B13         Copy of Lr.No.10186/MP1/Plg/HMDA dated 28.03.2011 addressed by HMDA to the Ops to pay publication charges for change of land use from residential to commercial.

Ex.B14         Copy of cash acknowledgement receipt bearing No.825631 for Rs.1,000/- in File No.2011-2-431 for new water connection.

Ex.B15         Copy of Certificate of best compliments issued by Indian Green Building Council in favour of the Opposite parties company.

Ex.B16         Copy of certificate of best compliments awarded by Cityscape in favour of the Opposite parties company.

Ex.B17         Copy of letter addressed by the Opposite parties to the purchaser by name S.Pragathi intimating to take possession of the flat, dated 02.11.2015.

Ex.B18         Copies of photographs of flat occupants occupying the completed flats.

PRESIDENT                                      MEMBER

Dated : 09.02.2017