BEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ATHYDERABAD.

FA.No.1592/2007 AGAINST C.C.No.464/2006 HYDERABAD

Between:

Janachaitanya Housing Ltd.,

Rep. by its Divisional Manager (CC)

And Incharge Branch Head, Having

Its office at D.No.8-3-168, 3^rdBhanuTowers, Opp:ESIHospital,

Erragadda,Hyderabad                                          

M.Dattatreya

S/o.M.Narasinga Rao,

Aged about 17 years (Minor)

Occ:Student, rep. by his father

and Natural guardian,

Mr.M.Narasinga Rao,

R/o.H.No.1-4-5/9/A/1,

Bholakpur, Hyderabad-500 060.                               Complainant.

Counsel for the Appellant: M/s.Gopi Rajesh Associates

Counsel for the Respondent: M/s.L.Sudhakar Reddy

FA.No.1593/2007 AGAINST C.C.No.466/2006 HYDERABAD

Between:

Janachaitanya Housing Ltd.,

Rep. by its Divisional Manager (CC)

And Incharge Branch Head, Having

Its office at D.No.8-3-168, 3^rdBhanuTowers, Opp:ESIHospital,

Erragadda,Hyderabad                                          

M.Visveshwar,

S/o.M.Narasinga Rao,

Aged about 20 years

R/o.H.No.1-4-5/9/A/1,

Bholakpur, Hyderabad-500 060.                               Complainant.

Counsel for the Appellant: M/s.Gopi Rajesh Associates

(common in both appeals)

Counsel for the Respondent: M/s.L.Sudhakar Reddy

(common in both appeals)

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

AND

SMT.M.SHREESHA,.

WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MAY,

TWO THOUSAND TEN

(Typed to the dictation of Smt.M.Shreesha, Hon’ble Member)
***

           These appeals are disposed of by a common order since the facts are identical in both the cases.

F.A.No.1592/2007:

Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.464/2006 on the file of District Forum-I,Hyderabad, opposite party preferred this appeal.

The brief facts as stated in the complaint are that the complainant purchased a plot from opposite party admeasuring 200 sq. yds. in the venture of Sai Lakshmi II situated atNanakramgudaVillage,Serilingampally Mandal, R.R.District in the year 2000 for a consideration of Rs.1700/- per sq. yd. and the sale consideration amount is payable in 40 instalments.         

Opposite party filed written version admitting that the complainant joined as    

Based on the evidence adduced i.e. Exs.A1 to A4 and the pleadings put forward, the District Forum allowed the complaint directing the opposite party to register the plot in favour of the complainant and further directed the complainant to pay the balance sale consideration and developmental charges. 

Aggrieved by the said order, the opposite party preferred this appeal.

It is the case of the complainant that he joined the scheme floated by the opposite party to purchase a plot admeasuring 200 sq. yds. for a consideration of Rs.1700 per sq. yd. payable in 40 monthly instalments in Sai Lakshmi-II situated atNanakramgudaVillage.     

            Without having any approved plan layout, the act of the opposite party in even selling the land and issuing pass books itself constitutes an act of deficiency in service.   

F.A.No.1593/2007:

Sd/-PRESIDENT.

                                                               JM                                                                    L.R. copy marked/not to be marked