Complaint Case No. CC/325/2018 | ( Date of Filing : 04 Sep 2018 ) |
| | 1. Sandhya Rao Kudpi | D/o K.Anantharama Rao, No.58, 4th Cross, Panduranganagara, Off Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru-560076. |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
Versus | 1. Karnataka Telecom Department Employees Co-operative Soicety | Karnataka Telecom Department Employees Co-operative Society, Ammims Castel, No.706, 1st Floor, Near St.Judes Church, R.T.Nagara, Bangalore, Rep. by its President/Secretary. |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
Final Order / Judgement | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023 CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.325/2018 DATED ON THIS THE 11th January 2019 Present: 1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT 2) Sri. Devakumar.M.C. B.E., LLB., PGDCLP - MEMBER COMPLAINANT/S | | : | Sandhya Rao Kudpi, D/o K.Anantharama rao, No.58, 4th Crosam panduranganagara, Off. Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru-560076. (Sri Dinesh Solanki, Adv.) | | | | | | | | V/S | | OPPOSITE PARTY/S | | : | Karnataka Telecom Department Employees Co-operative Society, Ammims Castel No.706, 1st Floor, Near St.Judes Church, R.T.Nagara, Bangalore, Rep. by its President/Secretary. (EXPARTE) | | Nature of complaint | : | Deficiency in service | Date of filing of complaint | : | 04.09.2018 | Date of Issue notice | : | 10.09.2018 | Date of order | : | 11.01.2019 | Duration of Proceeding | : | 4 MONTHS 7DAYS | | | | | | | | |
Sri H.M.SHIVAKUMARA SWAMY, President - This complaint is filed for a direction to opposite party to allot a site measuring 50 x 80 ft. and to registers the same in favour of the complainant in their layout named as Athmanandasagara, to pay compensation and costs of the proceedings.
- The brief facts alleged in the complaint are that the complainant was an aspirant for a site measuring 50 x 80 ft, at Athmanandasagara layout developed by opposite party and become the member. The complainant has paid a sum of Rs.6,57,020/- to the opposite party by cheque. Opposite party has assured that they would develop the layout and execute the sale deed in 18 months. But, failed to keep up their promise and the opposite party is executing sale deeds relating to other sites to other members of the society and there is failure on the part of opposite party to execute the sale deed. Thereby, a legal notice was issued on 03.05.2018, but, there is no reply from the opposite party. Hence, this complaint is filed.
- After registering the complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party served with notice, absent placed exparte. Then this matter is set down for evidence. During evidence, the complainant has filed her affidavit evidence and relied on documents. Further evidence closed. After hearing arguments, this matter is set down for orders.
- The points arose for our consideration are:-
- Whether the complainant establishes that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party in not allotting the site though received the consideration, thereby, complainant is entitled for the reliefs?
- What order?
- Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:
Point No.1 :- partly in the affirmative. Point No.2 :- As per final order, for the following :: R E A S O N S :: - Point No.1:- to establish her case, the complainant has filed affidavit evidence reiterating the allegations made in the complaint. The complainant become a member of opposite party society with an intention to get site measuring 50 x 80 ft. and she has deposited a sum of Rs.6,57,020/- towards cost for the site, shares and membership fee. The opposite party has assured to allot site in 18 months. But, there is no progress, even in December 2017. Thereby, the complainant has issued a legal notice to opposite party, in spite of it, there is no progress to execute sale deed. Thereby, the complainant has sought for the reliefs.
- The complainant has also produced documents to show that payment was made as alleged by the complainant. In spite of service of notice from this Forum, opposite party did not come forward to defend itself. Thereby, relying on the evidence placed on record, though the cost of the site was received from the complainant. As such, the opposite party is liable to answer the claim in question and complainant is entitled for the relief relating to the allotment of site, compensation and litigation expenses. Hence, point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative.
- Point No.2:- In view of the findings recorded on point No.1, the opposite party is to be directed to allot site measuring 50 x 80 ft. and to execute sale deed and also pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- with litigation expenses of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant. Hence, we pass the following order:-
:: O R D E R :: - The complaint is allowed in part.
- The opposite party is hereby directed to allot site measuring 50 x 80 ft. at its layout i.e. Athmanandasagara to the complainant in 2 months from the date of this order. Failing which, the opposite parties shall pay penalty of Rs.100/- per day till compliance of this order.
- The opposite party is hereby directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- with litigation expenses of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant in 2 months from the date of this order. In default to comply, the opposite party shall pay interest at 12% p.a. on the said total sum of Rs.1,02,000/- from the date of this complaint i.e. 04.09.2018 till compliance
- In case of default to comply this order, the opposite parties to undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
- Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.
(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 11th January 2019) | |