C.C.No.113/2010

Between

SRI. KODURU SUBBA REDDY,

S/o. Late Sri.K.Venku Reddy,

Aged 63 years, Resident of House No.T1,

Plot No. 85, Varasiddhi Nivas,

Road No.11, Film Nagar,

Jubilee Hills, HYDERABAD.

                                                                                    Complainant

And

1.SRI. MAMIDI JANARDHAN REDDY, [“ LAND OWNER 1”]    

   S/o. Sri Yadi Reddy, Aged 44 Years,

   Resident of Plot No.21, Jupiter Colony,

   Tirumalgherry, SECUNDERABAD – 500015.

2.Smt. MAMIDI PRASANNA,[‘LAND OWNER 2’]

   W/o. Sri Mamidi Janardhan Reddy,

   Aged 38  years, Resident of Plot No.21,

   Jupiter Colony,

   Tirumalgherry, SECUNDERABAD – 500015,

   Represented by her irrevocable General Power of

   Attorney Holder,

   Sri. MAMIDI JANARDHAN REDDY,

   S/o. Sri Yadi Reddy, Aged 44 Years,

   Resident of Plot No.21, Jupiter Colony,

   Tirumalgherry, SECUNDERABAD – 500015,

   Vide G.P.A.Document No.57/2006 dated 03-06-2006,

   Registered at S.R.O.,

   Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District.

3.M/s.SAI ARVIND PROPERTY DEVELOPERS,[“BUILDERS”]

   A partnership firm having its office at

   Ground Floor, Jewel Residency, Teacher’s Colony,

   East Marredpally, SECUNDERABAD – 500026,

   Represented by its Managing Partner

   Sri.GUDIMETLA KOTA NARASIMHA RAO,

   S/o. Late Kotilingam, Aged 63 years,

   Resident of Flat No.2-B2, Jagruthi Residency,

   Road No.10,East Marredpally, SECUNDERABAD – 500026

                                                                                                            Opposite Parties

C.C.No.114/2010

Between

SRI. BURLA  RAVINDRA REDDY,

S/o. Late Sri.Balakrishna Reddy,

Aged 63 years,

Resident of House at, Director’s quarters,

Near Kalyan Nagar Junction, Kalyan Nagar,

HYDERABAD.-500 045

                                                                        Complainant

And

1.SRI. MAMIDI JANARDHAN REDDY, [“ LAND OWNER 1”]    

   S/o. Sri Yadi Reddy, Aged 44 Years,

   Resident of Plot No.21, Jupiter Colony,

   Tirumalgherry, SECUNDERABAD – 500015.

2.Smt. MAMIDI PRASANNA,[‘LAND OWNER 2’]

   W/o. Sri Mamidi Janardhan Reddy,

   Aged 38  years, Resident of Plot No.21, Jupiter Colony,

   Tirumalgherry, SECUNDERABAD – 500015,

   Represented by her irrevocable General Power of Attorney Holder,

   Sri. MAMIDI JANARDHAN REDDY,

   S/o. Sri Yadi Reddy, Aged 44 Years,

   Resident of Plot No.21, Jupiter Colony,

   Tirumalgherry, SECUNDERABAD – 500015,

   Vide G.P.A.Document No.57/2006 dated 03-06-2006,

   Registered at S.R.O., Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District.

3.M/s.SAI ARVIND PROPERTY DEVELOPERS,[“BUILDERS”]

   A partnership firm having its office at

   Ground Floor, Jewel Residency, Teacher’s Colony,

   East Marredpally, SECUNDERABAD – 500026,

   Represented by its Managing Partner

   Sri.GUDIMETLA KOTA NARASIMHA RAO,

   S/o. Late Kotilingam       , Aged 63 years,

   Resident of Flat No.2-B2, Jagruthi Residency,

   Road No.10,East Marredpally, SECUNDERABAD – 500026

                                                                                                            Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Complainant                       :M/s.M.Hari Babu

  (common in both the complaints)

Counsel for the Opp.parties:              :  M/s,A.Venkataswamy O.Ps.1 and 2

(common in both the complaints)          Mr.V.V.Sambasiva Rao for O.P.3

QUORUM:  THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT,

                                                AND

                    SMT.M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE  MEMBER.

FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTHDAY OF NOVEMBER,       

TWO THOUSAND ELEVEN

 (Typed to the dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Hon’ble Member)
                                                          ****

The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant approached opposite parties 1 to 3 for booking a house in their venture   ‘Neha Hills’.  Opposite party No.3 has undertaken the construction of foundations of the above said 26 houses at NEHA HILLS and entered into a development agreement with opposite parties 1 and 2 for 26 houses in Ac.32.28 Guntas in Sy. Nos.46/1, 87, 88 and 89 and the complainant after examining the specifications/schedule C of each house to be constructed therein desired to have a 4 Bed room house in 267 sq. yds. (Basement + Ground + First floor) admeasuring totally 4,332. sft. to be constructed by opposite party No.3 at a total cost of Rs.80 lakhs and 25% of the cost was fixed by opposite party No.3 for entering into sale cum construction agreement.  The complainant paid Rs.17.2 lakhs through cheques dated 25-2-2008 for Rs.1 lakh, 13-3-2008 for Rs.13 lakhs 4-5-2008 for 3.2 lakhs to opposite party No.3 even before the sale-cum- construction agreement for House No.298.  The complainant submitted that the agreement should have been effected as on 04-5-2008 when an advance amount of Rs.17.2 lakhs was paid but opposite party No.3 demanded an additional amount of Rs.10 lakhs for the already laid basement slab.  Only after paying Rs.8 lakhs more through cheque on 13-5-2008 totalling to Rs.25.2 lakhs, the first sale cum construction came into effect with signature of all the opposite parties. 

The complainant submits that he was disturbed that the construction of House No.298 came to a stand still and there was no progress despite receiving Rs.25.2 lakhs and opposite party No.3 offered House No.297 and demanded Rs.10,00,000/- for cancellation of first agreement for House No.298 and entered  into a fresh agreement for H.No.297.  The complainant paid an amount of Rs.9 lakhs additionally on 12-6-2008  and in total an amount of Rs.34.2 lakhs was paid and after repeated requests, the second Sale-cum-Construction agreement for House no.297 was entered into on 03-11-2008 with the same construction area as that of H.No.298 and the completion period was prescribed as 9 months and an additional time schedule of six months from construction.  The opposite parties 1 to 3 gradually slowed down the construction activity of Six East Facing houses and totally stopped the construction of the rest of the 20 houses.  Thereafter the complainant was advised by opposite party No.3 to get the unfinished house registered at the earliest on payment of Rs.25.8 lakhs but the complainant was not interested as there was no progress as amenities like drinking water, sewage, roads, compound wall etc. were not there even after 23 months and the construction of H.No.297 even by April 2009 is still at brick work stage.  A draft agreement was prepared and emailed to opposite party No.3 on 5^th March, 2009 in which caluse 13 was incorporated giving a ‘right to vendee to withdraw and cancel the agreement for repayment of all payments within one month thereof.  The complainant sent e-mails to opposite party No.3 on 5-3-2009, 9-3-2009, 25-3-2009, 10-4-2009, 14-4-2009, 23-4-2009, 29-4-2009, 11-5-09 and 26-9-2009 and also made many phone calls and SMS  but he received evasive emails from the office of opposite party No.3 on 25-3-2009 and 15-4-2009 and SMS on 21-5-2009 stating that they cannot give reply  to mails without good progress of work and are expecting project finance from one Bank/NRI and this may materialize by one month. 

The complainant submitted that finally the third agreement of sale-cum- construction agreement for House No.297 was signed on 08-10-2009 by all the opposite parties recording the circumstances that led to the third agreement and the salient features are as follows:

a) “And whereas LAND OWNERS have agreed in the MOU of the above agreement to carry out the development of the entire layout of Acres 32.28 Guntas in Survey Nos 46/1, 87, 88 & 89 of Shamshabad Village, Ranga Reddy Dist as per sanction by Shamshabad Gram Panchayat with BT Roads, foot paths, underground drainage system, overhead water tank, septic tank, parks and electrical street lights, retaining wall on the southern side of the above plots etc;

b)  And whereas BUILDERS have agreed to own such responsibility as to see that above development is effectively completed by the LAND OWNERS as per the above agreement or otherwise themselves to take up and complete the above development well before completion of construction of the houses in the above plots so as to facilitate the VENDEE to take possession of the house with all the amenities therein;

c)  And whereas the BUILDERS have undertaken the construction of the above said houses in the above colony layout named as NEHA HILLS as per the sanctions accorded by Shamshabad Gram Panchayat on 1^st February 2007, approving the plans for construction of the said 26 (twenty six) houses;

d)  And whereas LANDOWNERS have agreed to authorize the BUILDERS to receive advance payments from the VENDEE retrospectively or prospectively through this “AGREEMENT OF SALE AND CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE”;

e)  The BUILDERS ought to have completed the construction of the said house and delivered possession of the same on or before 13^th  February 2009, with a grace time of three months beyond the said stipulated period of completion.  In the event of delay on the part of the BUILDERS in construction and delivering the possession of the houses, the BUILDERS shall be liable to pay to the VENDEE an amount of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) per month as rent.  Any such amount to be payable shall be adjusted at the time of handing over possession of the House.

f)  The BUILDERS shall not incur any liability if they are unable to construct and deliver the possession of the said house within the date stipulated herein above if the construction of the said house is delayed or stopped by reason of non-availability of steel or cement etc., or on any account of prevention, obstruction or prohibition by the authorities concerned, which ought to be for no fault of the BUILDERS.

g)  The VENDEE, at any time during this Agreement & prior to registration reserves his right to withdraw & cancel this agreement, whereupon all the money received by the Builders shall be repaid within one month thereof.”

16.  It may kindly be seen that no installment as indicated in the schedule of payment of the ‘sale-cum-construction’ agreement for house:297 is due to be paid by the complainant to the OP3.

The complainant submitted that there is no development of “Neha Hills” since April, 2009 inspite of several meetings with opposite party No.3 and also with opposite parties 1 and 2.  The complainant got the house valued by a valuer evaluating the total cost of land and expenditure of construction of House No.297 as Rs.22.4 lakhs and submitted that the actual price of isolated house without any neighborhood is much less.  The complainant submitted that the construction of House No.297 should have been completed on or before 13^th February, 2009  along with others but as the opposite parties could not get the project finance they could not resume the same even after 19 months since April, 2009.  The complainant submitted that he waited for 21 long months and he is also  in dire need of money for admission of his daughter in Indian School of Business and therefore expressed his desire to withdraw from the housing project by invoking clause 12 of the agreement which states that “The vendee, at any time during this agreement & prior to registration, reserves his right to withdraw & cancel this agreement whereupon all the money received by the Building shall be repaid within one month thereof”.  The complainant submitted that opposite party No.3 in the first week of April, 2010 agreed for repayment of Rs.34.2 lakhs after taking approval from other partners but requested some more time.  Opposite party No.3 agreed to repay Rs.9 lakhs in the first instance within a week and issue post dated cheques for the balance of Rs.25.2 lakhs and assurance was given to complete the repayment by September, 2010.  As opposite party No.3 could not keep his promise, the complainant approached LOK ADALAT and notices were served on all the opposite parties and the case was represented several times but an amicable consensus could not be arrived. The complainant submits that failure to complete the construction of housing project by the opposite party  in the time schedule is clear deficiency in service and hence filed the complaint for a directions to the opposite parties 1 to 3 to pay an amount of Rs.34.20 lakhs to the complainant with interest at 18% p.a. from the date of respective payments till realization together with compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- and costs of Rs.20,000/-.

        Opposite party No.1 filed written statement on his behalf and on behalf of his wife as GPA holder  denying the allegations made in the complaint.  They submitted that in good faith they entrusted “Neha Hills Project” to opposite party No.3 with an intention that the project could be completed  on time. They admitted that entered into Sale agreement for 26 plots with the developer i.e. opposite party No.3.  They submitted that the complainant had not made any payment to them and therefore he is not a consumer so far as the opposite parties 1 and 2 are concerned.  They submitted that in the Agreement of Sale and Construction of House dated 8-10-2009, the complainant has not paid any amount in any form to them and that they have no role to play in the construction of house.  They submitted that they are made parties to the Agreement of Plot No.27 as owners of land and permitted the builder to construct the house of the complainant on certain terms and conditions.  They are only liable to the extent of registering plot No.297 to the vendee when the amount due to them is received and Page 3 of Para 5 of the agreement clearly states that the Vendors have agreed to register the house to the vendee as and when it is constructed and prayed for dismissal of the complaint against them with costs.

        Opposite party No.3 filed written version denying the allegations made in the complaint.  He submitted that he was a reputed builder  and taken NEHA HILLS project to complete the same on time.  He submitted that as per business practice, he circulated brochures for business promotion and never compelled or forced the complainant for payment of huge amounts.  He submitted that the complainant after thorough inspection of the documents, verification of the features and sanctions accorded by various authorities was satisfied and came forward for purchase  of House No.298.  He submitted that he started construction of House No.298 on the persistence of the complainant and laid foundation.   The complainant entered into an initial agreement with opposite party No.3 on 13-5-2008 in the name of his wife for House No.298 for a value of Rs.80,00,000/- and paid an amount of Rs.25.20,000/- which is equivalent to 31.50% of the total cost.    The complainant had to fulfill his part of the agreement dt.13-5-2008 which reads as follows:

        Opposite party No.3 submitted that he completed the foundation of the house and also completed the house slabs and house partitions and started plumbing works, electrical, overhead water tank and sump and also compound wall for each house.  As per the schedule, on completion of foundation, another amount of Rs.10,80,000/- needs to be paid but only Rs.9,00,000/- was paid and there is still a due of Rs.1,80,000/- and no amounts were paid for completion of house slab partitions and brick works and other works.

        Opposite party No.3 submitted that at this point of time, the complainant had entered into another Agreement of sale and consturciton of House dated 08-10-2009 wherein he requested his name instead of his wife’s to be changed and also changed the house from 298 to 297 and had come up with fresh payment schedule which shows that an amount of Rs.34,20,000/- was paid out of total Rs.80,00,000/- which is equivalent to 42.75%. The balance amount of Rs.45,80,000/- is to be paid.  Opposite party No.3 submitted that after completion of the house slab, another Rs.10,00,000/- has to be given but the complainant failed to perform his part of the contract.  Opposite party No.3 submitted that the complainant is due an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- towards foundation and Rs.24,00,000/- towards completed house slabs, partitions and other works and failed to make any further payment for the progress of the house and along with this complainant, other co-owners also failed to keep up their schedule of payment and this resulted in stalling the project.  Opposite party No.3 submitted that the Agreement of Sale and Construction of House has been revised  three times by invoking new terms and conditions in complainant’s favour.  Opposite party No.3 further submitted that when he expressed his ability to finish the project and demanded payment of the balance amount, the complainant wanted to repudiate the Agreement as the market price of the said project had fallen and he wanted his money back.  The complainant also made other members who were about to pay the balance amount go back by initiating proceedings before Lok Adalath.  Opposite party No.3 submitted that due to depletion in market and Telangana agitation, their business had fallen and therefore he explained the situation to all members including the complainant and temporarily stopped the work and is waiting for restoration of the circumstances.  Opposite party No.3 submitted that he is ready and willing to perform his part of the obligation and requested all the members for accumulation of money and all the members responded positively except for the complainant. 

        Opposite party No.3 submitted that he invested a lot of money in the project and stated the present status of H.No.297 is as follows:

1.                All slabs of the house no.297 were completed as on 28.11.2008. Partitions were completed on 13.08.2009. Some plastering work also completed.   Finishing works are pending.

2.                The Purchase promised to pay the installment of slabs on completion of the same. Accordingly the Builder completed the slab works together with his neighbor’s houses bearing No.s 293 and 294. After some time, he insisted the completion of the partitions, so as we have completed the partitions. But, the purchaser did not fulfill his promises and not paid his installments.

3.                Due to Economical crises and non receipts of payments from the purchasers, the Builders stopped the work.

Opposite party No.3 submitted that out of total amount of Rs.80,00,000/-, the complainant paid only Rs.34,20,000/- and the balance payable is Rs.45,80,000/-.  Inspite of completion of foundation of the house and completion of house slabs and house partitions, an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- towards foundation, Rs.24,00,000/- towards house slab and another amount of Rs.8,00,000/- towards house partitions need be paid.  The advance amount paid Rs.34,20,000/- is towards the cost of the house site which is 266.66 sq. yds. which is at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per sq. yd. as per the first agreement dated 03-11-2008.  In the second agreement dated 08-10-2009 executed by the complainant there was a rescheduling of payment and even according to that Rs.10,00.000/- need to be given on completion of house slab and Rs.6,00,000/- be paid on completion of partitions and Rs.7,00,000/- be given on completion of wood works  and Rs.3,80,000/- on completion of miscellaneous works.  Whereas the house slab work was fully completed and part works like partitions, wood works and miscellaneous works are completed.  In the same schedule for electrification of house Rs.4,00,000/- and completion of water supply and sanitary works Rs.5,00,000/- need to be paid but none of these amounts were paid.  He submitted that the complainant is leading the other purchasers and preventing other owners from paying their respective due amounts which added to the market    trend in stalling the project.  Opposite party No.3 submitted that agreement of construction of house along with registration requires mutual performance of respective commitment and submitted that he so far invested Rs.5,00,00,000/- and above on his own on the project and need to complete the project not only for the complainant for also for himself and refund of the amount which is already invested on the plot is not possible and unrecoverable.  He submitted that on due completion of the project at the earliest possible time by opposite party No.3 after due registration on payment of the balance amount as owner of the subject house, the complainant is at liberty to sell the house.

    Opposite party No.3 further submitted that out of 26 houses in the project, he was able to sell 13 houses and only 4 are registered till date as they have made maximum payment and could not affect sales and substantial amounts were invested in  26 houses and whatever amount was received from the substantial buyers of the   houses was also reinvested in the project and several efforts were made to obtain finance which included loan sanction from Diwan Housing Finance Ltd., and from other financial institution i.e. Nityapushta investment Services, he could not succeed.  Opposite party No.3 submitted that the complainant needs to be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, inadmissibility of the Agreement of sale and Construction of House dated 08-10-2009 and also due to non performance of the complainant’s part of agreement  and he therefore, prays for dismissal of the complaint.

The brief point that falls for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service on behalf of the opposite parties and if the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed by him.

    The complainant filed his affidavit in support of his case and got marked Exs.A1 to A11  while the opposite parties 1 and 2 filed  affidavit of O.P.1 in support of their case and got  marked Ex.B1   and opposite party No.3 filed his affidavit and got marked Exs.B2  to B6.

        It is the complainant’s case that he paid an amount of Rs.25.20,000/- through cheques dated 25-2-2008 for Rs.1,00,000/-, 13-3-2008 Rs.13,00,000/- 4,5-2008 Rs.3,20,000/- and 13-5-2008 Rs.8 lakhs to opposite party No.3 for House No.298 initially which is a part of the 26 house construction project floated by opposite parties 1 to 3 vide Ex.A4 Development agreement entered into between land owners i.e. opposite parties 1 and 2 and the builder opposite party No.3.  Thereafter the complainant was unhappy with the progress of construction of house No.298 and thereafter paid an additional amount of Rs.9,00.000/- in cash on 12-6-2008 and on requested opposite party No.3 to allott House no.297 instead of H.No.298 vide agreement dated 08-10-2009 (Ex.A7).  The complainant submits that the period of completion is 9 months from the date of agreement.  It is the further case of the complainant  that the first agreement was entered into on 13-5-2008 and the second agreement was entered into on 03-11-2008 for H.No.297 and thereafter a third agreement of sale and construction (Ex.A7) was entered into in which clause 4 reads as follows:

4. The Builders ought to have completed the construction of the said house and delivered possession of the same on or before 13 February, 2009, with a grace time of three months beyond the said stipulated period of completion.  In the event of delay on the part of Builders in constructing and delivering the possession of the houses, the Builders shall be liable to pay to the Vendee an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) per month as rent.  Any such amount to be payable shall be adjusted at the time of handing over possession of the House.

                It is not in dispute that the total cost of the house is Rs.80,00,000/- as mentioned in the agreement and that the complainant has paid 34.20 lakhs  for the said house.  The complainant further contends that till the date of filing of complaint there was no progress in the construction and the building has come up only till the basement level and he got the said house 297 valued by a Chartered Engineer (Ex.A9) for Rs.22,42,000/- and submits that he had paid much more than this amount and therefore the contention of the opposite party No.3 that he could not progress because the complainant  could not pay the balance amounts cannot be sustained.

        It is the opposite parties 1 and 2 i.e. land owners case that no consideration has been paid to them and that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and them and hence no deficiency in service can be attributed to them.  They filed Ex.B1, Power of Attorney by which the first opposite party represents the second opposite party.

        It is the case of opposite party No.3 that the complainant is due Rs.45,80,000/- as per the stages of the construction and he has completed the electrification, water supply and sanitary works.  But we observe from the record that there is no documentary evidence filed in support of his contention.  Opposite party No.3 further contends that because of financial constraints and market conditions, the members did not pay the balance amounts of the individual villas and therefore there was a delay in completion of the project.  Opposite party no.3 filed Ex.B2, approval letter dated 29-6-2010 stating that the financial assistance for a term loan of Rs.4 crores has been sanctioned and Ex.B3 gives details of his other projects.  Ex.B4 gives the details of construction status of the current project.  In item D in Ex.B4, it is stated that the partitions are completed for House Nos.296 and 297 and plastering is still under progress.  While it is an admitted fact that the builder stopped the work due to economic crises and non receipt of payments from the purchasers, it is also to be considered that the complainant  has paid Rs.34.20 lakhs way back in 2008 itself but the builder did not progress with the construction.  Even Ex.A9, valuation report, by a chartered engineer states that the construction cost is only Rs.22,42,000/-.    It is an admitted fact that the complainant  paid an amount of Rs.34.20,000/- by 12-6-2008 for House no.297 and till the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 01-11-2010 as per the complainant’s affidavit, the opposite parties did not develop the layout and did not complete construction of the said house.  Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on behalf of the opposite party No.3 builder in receiving payments by 12-6-2008 itself and not adhering to terms of the agreement with respect to delivery of the possession of the said house and therefore we are of the considered view that clause 12 of Ex. A7 Agreement dated 08-10-2009 reads as follows:

12. The VENDEE, at any time during this Agreement & prior to registration reserves his right to withdraw & cancel this agreement, whereupon all the money received by the Builders shall be repaid within one month thereof.”

Keeping in view the aforementioned reasons, we direct opposite party No.3 to refund the amount of Rs.34.20,000/- paid by the complainant together with the interest at 9% p.a. from 08-10-2009 together with compensation of Rs.10,000/- and costs of Rs.5,000/-.   Case against opposite parties 1 and 2 is dismissed as we do not see any deficiency in service on their behalf as opposite parties are land owners and the complainant  did not establish by way of any documentary evidence that they have received payments with respect to H.No.297.

        In the result this complaint is allowed in part directing opposite party No.3 to refund the amount of Rs.34.20,000/- paid by the complainant together with the interest at 9% p.a. from 08-10--2009 together with compensation of Rs.10,000/- and costs of Rs.5,000/-.   Case against opposite parties 1 and 2 is dismissed as we do not see any deficiency in service on their behalf as opposite parties are land owners and the complainant  did not establish by way of any documentary evidence that they have received payments with respect to H.No.297.

C.C.No.114/2010

        For the same reasons as stated in C.C.No.114/2010, this complaint is also allowed in part  directing opposite party No.3 to refund the amount of Rs.35.00,000/- paid by the complainant together with the interest at 9% p.a. from 8-10-2009 together with compensation of Rs.10,000/- and costs of Rs.5,000/-.   Case against opposite parties 1 and 2 is dismissed as we do not see any deficiency in service on their behalf as opposite parties are land owners and the complainant  did not establish by way of any documentary evidence that they have received payments with respect to H.No.296.

                                                            Sd/-PRESIDENT.

                                                            Sd/-MEMBER.

JM                                                         Dt.11-11-2011

        //APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE//

  WITNESSESS EXAMINED

For Complainant                                                                           For Opp.Parties

 - Nil -                                                                                                              - Nil -

                          Affidavit of O.P.1 and

                                                                   O.P.3 filed.in both C.Cs.

for the complainant in CC 113/2010

Brochure on the dev elopement of Neha Hills Laout, showing 60 ft and                          40 ft roads,  366 plots in 32 acres & 28 guntas and specifications like all                               BT Roads , overhead tank, underground drainage system, electrical street                          lights, septic tanks, parks etc.

   Photostat copy of architect’s photographs of East face and west face houses.

  Photostat copy of specification in schedule C

   Photostat copy of “ development agreement” between opposite party 3 and                            and opposite parties 1 & 2 registered as document no.2315/2008                                         dt : 3-4-2008 at SRO, Shamshabad, Ranga reddy District for 26                                       (Twenty six ) Plots ( 289 to 301 to 317) situated at Survey no.46/1,                              88, & 88/A of Shamshabad.

Photostat copy of plan for house no. 296 as approved by Shamshabad                          Panchayath  as on 01-2-2007 with receipt.

Photostat copy of mail issued by O.P.

Photostat copy of the agreement of sale and construction dt : 8^th October                                  2009 for House No. 296.

Photo Pictures showing the layout and the housing project -4 No.s

                                          dt : 7-09-2010.

Exhibits marked for the opposite parties in CC 113/2010

             Registered Irrevocable General Power of Attorney bearing document                                        No. 57/2006

             Approval Letter of Nityapushta Investment Services.

             List of Projects executed by Sai Arvind Builders Group.

             Original submission of details for availing finance from                                                                Dewan Housing Finance Corporation.

             Original Photographs of the watchman, Supervisor and Project Manager                                                with negatives.

             Valuation certificate dt : 17.8.2011 obtained at the Sub-Registrar office,                          

                        Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy Dist.

for the complainant in CC 114/2010

             Brochure on the dev elopement of Neha Hills Laout, showing 60 ft and                                     40 ft roads,  366 plots in 32 acres & 28 guntas and specifications like all                                          BT Roads , overhead tank, underground drainage system, electrical street                                       lights, septic tanks, parks etc.

          Photostat copy of architect’s photographs of East face and west face houses.

             Photostat copy of specification in schedule C

Photostat copy of “ development agreement” between opposite party 3 and                              and opposite parties 1 & 2 registered as document no.2315/2008                                         dt : 3-4-2008 at SRO, Shamshabad, Ranga reddy District for 26                                       (Twenty six ) Plots ( 289 to 301 to 317) situated at Survey no.46/1,                              88, & 88/A of Shamshabad.

Photostat copy of plan for house no. 296 as approved by Shamshabad                         Panchayath  as on 01-2-2007 with receipt.

Photostat copy the agreement of sale and construction dt :8^th Oct,2009                         for House No: 296

Photo Pictures showing the layout and the housing project -4 No.s

Photostat copy of report of the approved valuer on House No.296                                            dt : 7-09-2010.

Copy of order of Lok Adalath.

Exhibits marked for the opposite parties in CC 114/2010

Registered Irrevocable General Power of Attorney bearing document                            No. 57/2006

Approval Letter of Nityapushta Investment Services.

List of Projects executed by Sai Arvind Builders Group.

Submission of details for availing finance from                                                                Dewan Housing Finance Corporation.

Original Photographs of the watchman, Supervisor and Project Manager                                  

Valuation certificate dt : 17.8.2011 obtained at the Sub-Registrar office,                                    Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy Dist.                 

Sd/-PRESIDENT.

                                                            Sd/-MEMBER.

JM                                                         Dt.11-11-2011