A.  P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : ATHYDERABAD

FA 358/2007 against C. D. No.51/2004 on the file of the District Forum,Nellore

Between :

1.                 Bezawada Dasaradharama Reddy,

S/o Ramachandra Reddy, Hindu, aged about 67 years

Business, R/o G2, Apritavilla Apartments,

Nellore, Nellore District.

2.                 Bezawada Naresh Chandra Reddy,

S/o Dasaradharama Reddy, Hindu, aged about 47 years

Business, R/o 6, Red land, Behind M. G. Brothers,

Darga Mitta,Nellore, Nellore District.

3.                 Kuruwada Satyanarayana

S/o Seshaiah, Hindu, property Holder, aged about 73 years

R/o 24-1624, Darga Mitta,Nellore, Nellore District -3

And

1.                 Apritavilla Flat Owners Association ( Regd),

Darga Mitta,Nellore, rep. by its President, C. Maruthi Rao

S/o Venkataramanaiah, Hindu, aged about 48 years

And secretary P.S. N. Chadaga, S/o Krishna Chadaga,

Hindu, aged about 59 years, having office at Apritavilla

Apartments Darga Mitta,Nellore

2.                 Bezwada

Hindu, aged about 43 years, Business, R/o G2 Apritavilla apartments

Behind M.G. Brothers, Darga MittaNellore, Nellore District.

3.                 M/s. Sai Saritha Estates private Limited, O/o 6 Rd land

Behind Nellore,Nellore

Rep. by its Managing Director 

( Respondents/opposite parties   

Counsel for the appellants                          

Counsel for the respondents                       

Coram             

And

Sri R. Lakshminarasimha Rao…     

Monday, the Seventh Day

Oral Order

****

The appellants are the opposite parties 1,2 and 4 in CD 51/2004 on the file of the District Forum, Nellore    

Aggrieved by the impugned order, this appeal is filed questioning the legality and propriety of it and sought it to be set side as erroneous.

The brief facts of the case are that the complainant is an association of all the flat owners who formed themselves as Arpita Villa Apartments. The opposite parties are the promoters and vendors of the said apartments developed flats onRedLands, Dargamitta,Nellore                      

The first opposite party          Civil Court. It is not correct to state that the first opposite party    

During the enquiry before the District Forum along with the evidence affidavit the complainant filed Ex. A-1 to A-19 in support of its contention. 

The District Forum adjudicated on the points, viz.,

Whether the complainant is a consumer ?  

After discussing 

In the appeal grounds the point that has been raised is that there is an admission that reading room and Gym room which were earmarked in the plan were handed over to the office bearers of the association earlier   premises to his son ( OP. 2 ), it is for them to seek relief Civil Court.

Point for consideration is , whether the impugned order suffers from any factual 

Undisputedly the opposite parties 1 and 2                                    The District Forum had discussed all the factual aspects   

In the result, the appeal is dismissed confirming the order of the District Forum. In the circumstances, each party to bear its own costs.