AT: HYDERABAD.

CC.NO.50/2012

Between:

Sri P.Ram Babu,

S/o.Hanumantha Rao,

Aged about 40 years,

Occ: Business, R/o.Flat No.204,

S.S.Residency, Vinayaka Nagar,

Hayathnagar, Hyderabad,

          And

Flat No.202, Sai Sapthagiri Residency,

Beside Rythu Bazar,

Vanastalipuram, Hyderabad.

…Complainant.

And

Sri M.Vijaya Kumar,

Managing Partner,

M/s.Sri Saptagiri Constructions,

R/o.Plot No.201, Road No.1,

Opp.Neela Dental Clinic,

Green Hills Colony,

Kothapet, Hyderabad.

           &

Flat No.201, Balaji Nivas,

V.V.Nagar Road,

Chaitanyapuri, Dilsukhnagar,

Hyderabad.

…Opposite party.

Counsel for the  Complainant          :  Mr..V.Srinivas.

Counsel for the Opp. Party              :  None. Opp.Party Set Exparte.

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

SMT.M.SHREESHA, HON’BLE MEMBER,

AND

SRI S.BHUJANGA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER.

TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER,

TWO THOUSAND TWELVE.

Oral Order:  (Per Hon’ble Justice Sri D.Appa Rao, President)

***  

This complaint is filed against the opposite party-builder for execution of registered sale deed in his favour and to pay Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation and costs. 

It is the case of the complainant that in the venture promoted by the opposite party-builder, he purchased flat No.203 admeasuring 1045 square feet in the second floor together with an undivided share of 46 square yards out of the total extent of 567.06 square yards bearing Plot No.15 and 16 in Sy.No.201 of Saheb Nagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, for a total consideration of Rs.25,50,000/-.  He paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- under agreement of sale dated 13.03.2009.  He paid the balance sale consideration of Rs.17,75,000/- on various dates.  Later in the month of September, 2010, the opposite party delivered the flat.  However, he did not execute sale deed, despite the fact that he had paid the entire stamp duty and registration charges.  On that, he issued a lawyer’s notice on 12.04.2012 directing him to execute registered sale deed.  However, the said notice was not served.  Therefore, he filed the complaint directing the opposite party to execute registered sale deed in his favour, and pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- and costs.

            The opposite party-builder did not choose to contest the matter, despite the fact that a notice was served on him.

The complainant in proof of his case filed his affidavit evidence and got the documents marked as Ex.A.1 to A.18.

            The point that arises for consideration is whether the opposite party could be directed to execute registered sale deed in favour of the complainant?

            The complainant entered into an agreement of sale with the opposite party, evidenced under Ex.A.1 dated 13.03.2009, for sale of flat No.203 in the second floor  of Sri Sai Sapthagiri Residency, for a total consideration of Rs.25,50,000/-.  He paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- under the agreement of sale towards advance.  He paid the remaining balance of sale consideration, evidenced under Ex.A.2 to A.14 on various dates.  The opposite party in fact agreed to complete the construction before 16.10.2010, vide Ex.A.15 undertaking dated 01.10.2010,and accordingly delivered possession in September, 2010.  It is also clear that he had paid the stamp duty and registration charges and the opposite party having received the same did not execute the registered sale deed.  The opposite party did not choose to controvert any of these facts.  Therefore, the facts mentioned in the complaint stand uncontroverted.  The complainant could establish that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in not executing the sale deed.  The complainant is entitled for execution of the sale deed.  Since the opposite party has been denying execution of sale deed althrough, and considering the consideration received and the period which he had taken for execution of sale deed, we are of the opinion that a compensation of Rs.25,000/- could be awarded which we feel reasonable and modest. 

In the circumstances, the complaint is allowed in part.  The opposite party is directed to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order.  He is also directed to pay Rs.25,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs.10,000/-.  Time for compliance one month.              

1)         _______________________________

PRESIDENT                       

2)                 ________________________________

MEMBER

3)                 ________________________________

MEMBER

*vvr                                                                                                   06/11/2012

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Documents marked on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex.A.1:   Agreement of sale dated 13.03.2009.

Ex.A.2            :   Receipt dated 28.01.2009.

Ex.A.3            :   Receipt dated 07.02.2009.

Ex.A.4    Receipt dated 26.03.2009.

Ex.A.5    Receipt dated 09.03.2009.

Ex.A.6:   Receipt dated 07.03.2009.

Ex.A.7:   Receipt dated 13.05.2010.

Ex.A.8:   Receipt dated 18.01.2010.

Ex.A.9:   Receipt dated 15.10.2009.

Ex.A.10: Receipt dated 02.10.2009.

Ex.A.11: Receipt dated 22.10.2009.

Ex.A.12: Receipt dated 21.07.2009.

Ex.A.13: Receipt dated 13.09.2009.

Ex.A.14: Receipt dated 10.01.2010.

Ex.A.15:  Undertaking dated 01.10.2010.

Ex.A.16:  Bankers cheque dated 13.06.2011.

Ex.A.17:  Demand Draft dated 13.06.2011.

Ex.A.18:  Draft Sale Deed dated 13.06.2011.

1)         _______________________________

PRESIDENT                       

2)             ______________________________

MEMBER

3)             ______________________________

MEMBER

*vvr                                                                                                     06/11/2012