DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD Dated this the 9th day of February 2012 Present : Smt.Seena H, President : Smt.Preetha G Nair, Member : Smt.Bhanumathi A.K. Member Date of Filing : 18/11/2010 (C.C.No.151/2010) P.V.Santhosh. W/o.G.S.S.Iyer, Flat No.GA Ambika Apartments, Manalmantha, Ambikapuram Post, Palakkad – 11 : Complainant (By Adv.Unni Thomas) V/s K.Sheshadri, S/o.Late N.Krishna Iyer, Vrindavan, Kailas Nagar, Kalpathy, Palakkad - 3 : Opposite party (By Adv.V.K.Venugopalan) (C.C.No.152/2010) R.Shankaranarayanan. S/o.R.Rajagopalan, Flat No.FB Ambika Apartments, Manalmantha, Ambikapuram Post, Palakkad – 11 : Complainant (By Adv.Unni Thomas) V/s K.Sheshadri, S/o.Late N.Krishna Iyer, Vrindavan, Kailas Nagar, Kalpathy, Palakkad - 3 : Opposite party (By Adv.V.K.Venugopalan) (C.C.No.154/2010) Ambujam, W/o.P.V.Lakshmanan, Flat No.GB, Ambika Apartments, Manalmantha, Ambikapuram Post, Palakkad – 11 : Complainant (By Adv.Unni Thomas) V/s K.Sheshadri, S/o.Late N.Krishna Iyer, Vrindavan, Kailas Nagar, Kalpathy, Palakkad - 3 : Opposite party (By Adv.V.K.Venugopalan) COMMON ORDER By Smt.BHANUMATHI.A.K. MEMBER An I.A. was filed by opposite party in the above cases on 1/9/2011 seeking permission for joint trial. It was allowed on 12/9/2011. The above complaints were filed by the respective complainants praying for rectification of deficiencies in construction of individual flats and provide all amenities as per the agreement between the respective parties to the complainants failing which to refund the additional amount collected by the opposite parties from the respective complainants with interest and also for a compensation for mental agony and cost. The complainants in CC 151/2010, CC 152/2010 and CC 154/2010 have entered into identical individual agreements with the opposite party but separate individual agreements all dated 20/1/08 for purchase of individual flats in Ambikapuram apartments from the opposite party. A similar amount of 9 lakhs were paid by the respective complainants for right title and ownership of respective flats along with 1/6 right on land for individual flat owners. An amount of Rs.3,25,000/- was demanded and received for the flat by the opposite party from the complainants in addition to the contributed amount towards amenities at extra cost and other provision mentioned in the agreement. Then the complainants paid the opposite parties an amount of Rs.12,25,000/- towards the cost of the flats, interest on land and amenities provided for in the agreement to the opposite party. Complainants made prompt payments but opposite party dragged the construction of the flat and made delay of 16 months to complete the work. Also there are many defects in the construction of the flat. So the complainant praying an order directing the opposite party to rectify the deficiencies in construction and provide all amenities as per the terms and conditions of the agreement or to refund Rs.3,25,000/- with interest @15% per annum and 5,00,000/- as compensation and cost. The common defects alleged by the complainants of all the cases is the construction work and the lack of amenities are the following. Electrical Work - Only 1 No. 15 ampere plug point has been provided as against 2 Nos. of committed to. The one provided in the kitchen is also not properly placed.
- Exhaust fan in the kitchen is not provided although separately paid for
Water Supply Water tap for the out let not provided in the attached toilet of the rear Bed Room. Civil Work - Provision for open show case / shelf not provided in the Drawing Hall
- Ferro cement slabs in work area and kitchen rack not provided
- The additional cost for the Balcony grill and Aluminum works charged for 60 Sq.ft. as against 30 Sq.Ft.
- Cracks are noticed in the walls of the small bed room and the dining area . Theses cracks are noticed both inner and outer sides of the wall at the same location.
The common wall with flat GB is having a crack. Deficiency in service of the opposite party in respect of common provisions are - Compound wall on three sides of the apartment premises other than the front road side, not provided
- Cracks have been formed at three locations in the compound wall provided in the front.
- Roofing with GI sheet and Truss on the terrace of the apartment not provided.
- Decorative concrete blocks in the front yard as per the agreement is not provided
- No yard concreting has been carried out on both sides and the rear near the boundary of the apartment premises.
- Exclusion transformer mentioned for electricity connection not provided.
- The drinking water well does’nt have a permanent safety cover
- One of the rain water down take pipes in the rear is incomplete.
Opposite party entered appearance and fled version in all cases with the following contentions. Opposite party admits the agreement dated 20/1/08 and registration of sale deed in respect of 1/6th undivided interest in the land in favour of the complainants. Opposite party denies the contention of the complainant that the opposite party has dragged and delayed the construction work even though the payments are made correctly by the complainants. The flats were ready long back. The electrical and water connections were delayed without these facilities complainants were not ready to take possession. Due to shortage of electricity and voltage problem, and scarcity of water the concerned departments were not inclined to cater for new flats. Allegation regard to the complainants in flat that only one number of 15 ampere plug point has been provided as against 2 as desired by the complainants. The complainant wanted the opposite party to fix 5 ampere plugs in all the switch towards instead of other 15 ampere plug. Exhaust fans and KWA water connection to the toilet has already been provided. There is no agreement to provide water tap for the outlet in the attached toilet of the rear bed room. There is no agreement to provide compound walls on all the four sides. Compound walls on three sides will be provided at extra cost. Provision for terrace roofing and for decorative concrete block with front yard are provided. Yard concreting on these sides are done though not provided for in the agreement. There is no agreement to provide exclusive transformer. There is no agreement or payment made for safety cover for the well. The rain water down take pipe in the rear is also completed. The agreement provides for amenities to be provided at extra cost. Towards that complainant was charged an amount of Rs.78,925/- which is due from the complainants to opposite party . There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party and prays for the dismissal of the complaint with cost of the opposite party. Evidence consists of oral testimony of PW1 and DW1. Proof affidavit of both sides in all cases and Commission Report. Ext.A1 to A7 marked on the side of the complainants. Ext.B1 to B7 marked on the side of the opposite party We have gone through the entire documents and heard the parties deeply. Now the issues for consideration are - Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party ?
- If so what is the relief and cost ?
Issue No.1 & 2 Commissioner filed a detailed report after inspecting both the apartments. On going through the documents Ext.A1 and A7 are admitting by the opposite party. According to Ext.A1 document the complainants paid a similar amount of Rs.9,00,000/- to the opposite party as cost of the each flat in Ambika Apartment and 1/6 right on the land on which flats stand. But in the complaint the complainants stated that they have paid a similar amount of Rs.12,25,000/- each to the opposite party for the flats, 1/6 right on the land and the provision of amenities in the affidavit opposite party projected a statement of payments made by the complainant which is not challenged. The complainant have not produced any documents to show that they have paid Rs.3,25,000/- in addition to the contractual amount of Rs.9,00,000/- The Ext.A7 document shows that the cost of the land is Rs.80,000/- Balance amount of the contractual amount is Rs.8,20,000/- According to Ext.A1 document the flats are of 1130 Sq.ft. Thus the construction charge of each Sq.ft. is Rs.725.66. So we seem that the contractual amount would not include the amount for providing amenities at extra cost. The main grievance of the complainants in all cases are the roofing with GI sheet over truss on the terrace is not provided. Decorative concrete blocks in the front yard as per the agreement is not provided. Compound wall on these sides of the apartment premises other than front road side not provided and 3 phase wiring not provided. All these amenities come under the head of amenities given at extra cost. The details of provision and construction specification for the flats are given as a part of the A1 document. In this it can be seen as last but one and last two sub heading. They are common provision and amenities given at extra cost. The amenities which are stated under the heading of common provisions they can be used by the flat owners of each apartments as common. The works stated under the heading of amenities give at extra cost those works will be done only on payment of extra cost. Other grievances of the complainants are open show case not provided in the drawinghall. The drinking water well does not have a permanent safety cover etc. According to A1 document there is no provision for open show case in the drawing hall. The safety cover for drinking water well is not at all mentioned in the agreement. Even though it is not mentioned in the agreement it is done after filing the complaint. At the time of cross examination PW1 agreed it. PW1 also specifically stated that all the complainants in all cases were very close relatives. So that there may be some mutual adjustment are taken place between the complainants in both the apartments in constructing well, compound wall etc. It is evident from Ext.A1 document in CC/153/10 that the right in the well is decided to be 1/12. According to C1 one transformer is provided for both the apartments. Three phase wiring is done. The air cracks in plastering is to be rectified. The use of substandard materials for construction is not mentioned in the Ext.C1. Ext.B5, B6, B7 shows that the complainant paid some amounts to opposite party. In these letters it is stated that “ hand over the proceeds to Sri.Unni, who executing the job”. The works done by Unni are out side the work mentioned in the agreement. From the above discussions we are not in a position to attribute any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. In the result complaint dismissed. No order as to cost. Pronounced in the open court on this the 9th day of February 2012. Sd/- Seena.H President Sd/- Preetha G Nair Member Sd/- Bhanumathi A.K. Member APPENDIX Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant 1.Ext. A1 – Agreement dated 20/1/2008 2. Ext. A2 – Photocopy of lawyer notice dtd.6/7/2020 issued by Adv.Unni Thomas 3. Ext. A3 – Copy of letter dated 31/5/10 addressed to K.Seshadri 4. Ext. A4 – Copy of letter dated 12/6/10 addressed to K.Seshadri 5. Ext.A5 – Copy of letter dated 30/6/10 addressed to K.Seshadri 6. Ext.A6 – Power of Attorney dtd.1/6/11 7.Ext.A7 – Photocopy of Agreement dated 18/6/2008 Complainant examined PW1 – Lakshmanan.P.V Exhibits marked on the side of the Opposite Party 1.Ext. B1 – Copy of reply to Lawyer notice dated 29/7/11 issued by Adv.V.K.Venugopalan to Adv.Unni Thomas 2.Ext. B2 –Reply notice to Adv.Unni Thomas returned unserved with the reason unclaimed 3.Ext. B3 – Occupancy certificate issued by Palakkad Municipality in respect of the flat in Ambika Apartments dtd.22/12/09 4. Ext. B4 – Copy of the work memo submitted before the Commissioner 5.Ext.B5 – Copy of letter dated 30/1/09 addressed to K.Seshadri 6.Ext.B6 - Copy of letter dated 21/3/09 addressed to K.Seshadri 7.Ext.B7 - Copy of letter addressed to K.Seshadri Witness examined on the side of opposite party DW1 – Unnikrishnan Commission Report C1 – Er.Anandan Costs No Cost allowed. | 
