This case coming on 30.09.2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri P. Srinivas, Advocate for the Complainant and Sri U.S.V. Prasad & Sri P. Sukumar Rao, Advocate for the Opposite Parties and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

                                                ORDER

        (As per Smt. K. Saroja Honourable Lady Member on behalf of the Bench)

1.       The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant booked  plots bearing Nos.567 & 568 in total measuring 120 Sq. Yds.  in the name and style of “ROYAL HILLS-II” layout, Agreement for Sale dated11.04.2009 was executed in favour of the Complainant by the  Opposite Parties.   As per the Sale Agreement the total sale consideration of both plots, each Rs.1,80,000/- and the total sale consideration is paid by the Complainant on different dates.    After paying the entire amounts, the Complainant approached the Opposite Parties and requested the Opposite Parties to register the plots, but the Opposite Party informed, the Complainant that the layout was not approved and it will be developed soon after.   The 2^nd Opposite Party issued a letter dated 9.9.2011 stating that the VUDA will be approved the plots and they will be obtained permission by 10.12.2011 then they will be registered the plots in favour of the Complainant, but till now the Opposite Parties did not develop the venture and failed to register the plots in favour of the Complainant.   Then the Complainant issued a legal notice and it was not received the Opposite Parties kept quiet.   Then the Complainant issued a legal notice but there is no response from the Opposite Parties.   Hence, this Complaint.

2.       i) To repay the part Sale Consideration along with interest from 09.10.2009 i.e., Rs.3,24,527/- (Rupees three lakhs twenty four thousand, five hundred and twenty seven only) with subsequent interest @ 24% from the date of this Complaint to till date of realization;

          ii) To pay Rs.1,80,000/- (Rupees One lakh and eighty thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony;

iii) For costs of this Complaint; and

iv) For such other relief or reliefs as the Forum may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

3.       The Opposite Parties strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from their counter.   The 2^nd Opposite Party filed a counter and adoption memo filed by the 1^st Opposite Party.   The Opposite Parties denied all the allegations made by the Complainant stating that due to some technical reasons, they did not develop which is not in the hands of the Opposite Parties.    As such, there is no willful deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties.   The Opposite Party did not develop the layout is not intentional but due to Government policies and technical reasons, in those circumstances, the layout is not approved.    So, they have no liability to pay any reliefs asked by the Complainant.

4.       At the time of enquiry, both the Opposite Parties filed their affidavits as well as written arguments to support their contentions.    Exs.A1 to A7 are marked for the Complainant.    No documents were marked for the Opposite Parties.    Heard both sides.

5.       ExA1 is the Sale Agreement on 11.04.2009.   Ex.A2 is the Receipt issued by the Managing Director of Opposite Parties on 11.4.2009.   Ex.A3 issued by the Managing Director on 5,5.2009.   Ex.A4 issued by the Managing Director on5.5.2009.    Ex.A5 is the letter issued by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant dated 9.9.2011.   Ex.A6 is the Registered Lawyer’s Notice issued by the Complainant in favour of the Opposite Parties 18.06.2012.   Ex.A7 are 2 Acknowledgment Cards.

6.       The fact shown from the document Ex.A1 reveals that the Complainant paid total consideration of Rs.1,80,000/- towards registration of Plot Nos.567 and 568.   Exs.A2, Ex.A3 and Ex.A4 are reveals that the Complainant paid Rs.20,000/-, Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.60.000/- on 11.04.2009,  5.5.2009 and 5.5.2009 respectively.  

7.       The point that would arise for determination in the case is:-

Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.  The Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

8.         After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that the Complainant paid total amount towards sale consideration.   Though the Complainant paid total consideration the Opposite Parties failed to register the plots in favour of the Complainant till now.    The Opposite Parties failed to file any piece of evidence before this Forum as they got VUDA approval and developed the venture as per their Sale Agreement.  According to their agreement in Clause-II  in case of any delay or any problem arises for obtaining the necessary approvals, the company will pay money back with interest @ 15% p.a. for paid amount after 12 months from the date of this agreement, but they failed.    It shows the negligent act of the Opposite Parties coupled with unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties    It amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.   Hence, the Complainant is entitled to refund of amount with interest some compensation and costs too.

9.       In the result, this Complaint is allowed directing the Opposite Parties 1and 2: 1) to pay an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- (Rupees One lakh and eighty  thousand only) with interest @ 15% p.a. from 5.5.2009 to till the date of actual realization; to pay 2) a compensation of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) and c) Costs of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) to the Complainant.   Time for compliance, one month from the date of this order.   Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only).

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this 22^nd day of October, 2014.

Sd/-                                              Sd/-                                Sd/-

President                            Male Member                      Lady Member

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

For the Opposite Parties:-     

                                                -Nil-

Sd/-                                              Sd/-                                Sd/-

President                       Male Member                                             Lady Member