Date of Filing: 24.01.2008<br /> Date of Order: 19.05.2008<br /> BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 19th DAY OF MAY 2008<br /> <br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. Bajentri H.M, B.A, LL.B., President<br /> Smt.C.V. Rajamma, B.Sc., LL.B., PGDPR, Member<br /> Sri. M. Nagabhushana, B.Com, LL.B., Member<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO. 214 OF 2008<br /> Smt. Shashikala. C,<br /> R/at: No.767, 8th Main Road,<br /> Mahalakshmi Layout,<br /> Bangalore-560 086.<br /> Rep. by her GPA Holder<br /> Sri. K.C. Hombaiah,<br /> R/at: No.2, 80 feet road,<br /> Mariyappanapalya,<br /> Jnanabharathi Post,<br /> BANGALORE-560 056. …. Complainant.<br /> <br /> -V/s-<br /> <br /> 1. M/s. Meghacity (Bangalore)<br /> Developers & Builders Limited,<br /> Megha Tower, No.120,<br /> Kengal Hanumaiah Road,<br /> Bangalore-560 027.<br /> Rep. by the Managing Director<br /> C.P. Yogeeshwara.<br /> <br /> 2. Sri. Yogeeswara,<br /> Managing Director,<br /> M/s. Meghacity (Bangalore)<br /> Developers & Builders Limited,<br /> Megha Tower, No.120,<br /> Kengal Hanumaiah Road,<br /> Bangalore-560 027. …. Opposite Parties.<br /> ORDER<br /> This Complaint is filed for a direction to the opposite parties to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the complainant in respect of site No.124, in Block-C, 1st Phase of VAJRAGIRI TOWNSHIP measuring East to West 30 feet North to South 40.5 feet and to pay liquidate of damages of Rs.3,00,000/- on the following grounds:-<br /> Mr. Jayaprakash S, the husband of the complainant was a member of the opposite party Company for allotment and sale of a site in VAJRAGIRI TOWNSHIP developed by the opposite parties. He paid the entire sale consideration, the developmental charges so also the registration charges and miscellaneous expenses as demanded by the opposite parties. Site No.124 measuring East to West 30 feet North to South 40.5 feet in Block-C, 1st Phase of VAJRAGIRI TOWNSHIP was allotted to him. Possession Certificate dated: 24.07.2001 was also issued. In spite of payment of full sital value so also registration charges the opposite parties failed to execute a registered sale deed in his favour. On the death of Mr. Jayaprakash, as per the letter dated: 13.07.2001 the membership was transferred to the name of the complainant. Even thereafter, in spite of repeated reminders the opposite party failed to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the complainant. Therefore she issued legal notice dated: 30.10.2007 calling upon the opposite parties to execute sale deed in her favour. In spite of receipt of notice, the opposite parties neither complied with the demand nor gave reply. Hence the complaint.<br /> <br /> 2. In the version among other grounds the opposite parties have contended that site No.124 in ‘C’ Block has been formed out of Survey No.89 of Seshagiri Village and the owner of the said land had executed a sale deed in favour of the opposite party. Subsequently there was a dispute among the family members and proceedings have been initiated before the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division in RA No. (LKP) 200/2006-2007 and the same is pending. Therefore the opposite party is not in a position to execute the registered sale deed at present. If the complainant is prepared to wait till the disposal of the litigation the opposite party is ready to execute the sale deed. If the complainant is not prepared to wait, the Company is ready to refund the amount paid by her husband. The Company has made arrangement to refund the amount paid by the complainant with bank rate of interest. It also communicated to almost all the members to receive back the advance amount as the Company is not in a position to complete the project due to the above reasons. Since the Company has invested huge amount towards the land and the amount so invested is held-up in civil litigation and acquisition proceedings, it is not liable to pay damages as claimed. On these grounds the opposite parties has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In support of the respective contentions, both the parties have filed affidavits and have produced documents. We have heard the arguments on both sides.<br /> 4. The points for consideration are:-<br /> (1) Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?<br /> <br /> (2) Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?<br /> <br /> 5. Our findings on the above points are:<br /> POINT No.1:- In the Affirmative.<br /> POINT No.2:- As per the final order.<br /> REASONS<br /> POINT Nos. 1 & 2:-<br /> 6. There is no denial of the fact that earlier Mr. Jayaprakash the husband of the complainant was member of the opposite party Society, he was allotted Site No.124 in ‘C’ Block, 1st Phase of VAJRAGIRI TOWNSHIP and he had paid the full sital value and other charges to the opposite party. The letter dated: 12.07.2001 produced by the complainant at Exhibit - P.6 addressed by the opposite party to the husband of the complainant makes it clear that, the entire amount towards cost of site and development charges were paid to the Company. The receipts Exhibits – P.4 & P.5 dated: 26.06.2001 also make it clear that Mr. Jayaprakash had paid even the registration fee of Rs.7,550/- and miscellaneous fee of Rs.1,400/- to the Company during June-2001. After payment of the entire amount towards sital value and other charges the Company also issued Possession Certificate dated: 24.07.2001 in respect of site No.124 in favour of Mr. Jayaprakash. Admittedly after the death of Mr. Jayaprakash, the membership was transferred to the name of the complainant. In spite of receiving the entire amount towards sital value, registration fee and other charges as long back as in June-2001 the opposite party failed to execute registered sale deed in favour of the complainant. This act of the opposite party clearly amounts to deficiency in service. Now it is contended by the opposite parties that, site No.124 allotted in favour of the husband of the complainant has been formed out of Survey No.89 of Seshagirihalli, the Company had purchased the said land from the owners, but subsequently a dispute was raised by the family members and in that regard the proceedings have been initiated before the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division in R.A. No. (LKP) 200/2006-2007, the same is pending and therefore the opposite party is not in a position to execute sale deed in favour of the complainant at present. It is also contended in Para-6 of the version that, if the complainant is prepared to wait till the disposal of the litigation, the Company is ready to execute the sale deed immediately after the completion of the legal proceedings. The complainant has filed a Memo on 02.05.2008 enclosing the copy of the order in Appeal No.839/2007 passed by the Honorable State Commission that she is willing to purchase the site in question subject to the risk involved. From the copies of the documents produced by the opposite parties it is also seen that, a litigation in respect of Survey No.89 of Seshagirihalli is pending in R.A. No. (LKP) 200/2006-2007 before the Assisstant Commissioner, Ramanagaram Sub-Division. It may be that due to the pendency of the above litigation the opposite party is not in position to execute sale deed in favour of the complainant. However the opposite party has expressed its intention to execute sale deed in favour of the complainant soon after the litigation is concluded. As per the Memo dated: 02.05.2008 the complainant has expressed her intention to purchase the site from the opposite parties subject to risk involved with regard to the title of the property. In that event it is just and proper to direct the opposite parties to execute sale deed in favour of the complainant immediately after the final conclusion of the pending litigation or subject to the complainant taking risk involved. Though the complainant has claimed damages of Rs.3,00,000/- no foundation is laid for such claim. In the facts and circumstances of the case in our opinion, the complainant is not entitled to the damages as claimed. In the result, we pass the following:-<br /> ORDER<br /> 7. The complaint is allowed in part. The opposite party is directed to execute registered sale deed in favour of the complainant in respect of Site No. 124 in Block ‘C’, 1st Phase, of VAJRAGIRI TOWNSHIP within two months from the date of final conclusion of the litigation pending before the Assistant Commissioner, Ramanagara Sub-Division. If the complainant is prepared to purchase the site subject to the risk involved, the opposite party shall execute the sale deed in her favour within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. The opposite party shall also pay costs of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant.<br /> <br /> 8. Send a copy of this order to both the parties free of costs immediately.<br /> <br /> 9. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 19th DAY OF MAY 2008.<br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br />