THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF JUNE, 2024
APPEAL NO.83/2023
PRESENT
SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI, MEMBER
M/s.Tapovan Projects,
Corporate office at #1546,
C&D Block, Kuvempunagar, ...Appellant/s
Mysuru-570 023
Represented by its
Authorized representative
Mr.Ajay Kumar.M.R.
(By Sri.Siddharth.P.Desai, Advocate)
-Versus-
Mr.Vasanth.N,
S/o Narayanappa,
Aged about 41 years, ... Respondent/s
#FOF-01, Janananivas apartment,
5th Stage, BEML Layout,
Rajarajeshwarinagar,
Bengaluru-560 098
(By Sri.K.V.Narasimhan, Advocate)
O R D E R
BY SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The Opposite Party in complaint No.61/2021 has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the District Consumer Commission, Mysuru which directed this appellant to pay an amount of Rs.43.00 lakhs from 29.1.2016 with interest @10% per annum, Rs.50,000/- compensation for deficiency in service, Rs.25,000/ for mental agony and Rs.3,000/- litigation expenses and submits that the complainant entered into an agreement for purchase of the villa and paid an amount of Rs.43.00 lakhs i.e. 85% of the entire consideration amount. After receipt of the said, they have entered into an agreement and this appellant undertaken to complete the project and hand over the villa within 18 calendar months from the date of agreement to sale. Due to unavoidable circumstances, they could not complete the project and handed over the possession. The said facts are all known to the respondent and he has cooperated in this regard. Inspite of that the complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission alleging deficiency in service and sought for refund of the entire amount.
2. The District Commission after trial allowed the complaint and directed this appellant to pay the above said amount. In fact the order passed by the District Commission is not in accordance with law. The project/villa which was undertaken to give possession was completed and if the respondent is ready to pay the balance consideration amount, they are going to execute the sale deed and give possession in favour of respondent. Though there is no any deficiency of service, directed this appellant to pay the above said amount, instead of directing the respondent to pay the balance amount and cooperative with respect to the execution of the sale deed. The order passed by the District Commission is not in accordance with law. Hence, prays to set aside the order passed by the District Commission, in the interest of justice and equity.
3. Heard from both sides.
4. Perusal of the certified copy of the order, memorandum of appeal, it is an admitted fact that an amount of Rs.43.00 lakhs was paid by the complainant and respondent/complainant agreed to handover the possession and execute the sale deed within 18 months from the date of execution of agreement, but this appellant had failed to hand over the possession well within time. The reasons assigned by this appellant are satisfactory anyhow there are some villas were handed over to some other person, at the same time during the course of arguments the respondents also agreed to take the possession subject to completion of the entire project within particular period. Considering the submission and arguments, we are of the opinion that the award passed by the District Commission is requires to be modified and direction be given to the appellant for execution of the sale deed within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Further the Opposite Party is also liable to pay compensation of Rs.2.00 lakhs for delay in not giving possession and executing the sale deed along with litigation expenses of Rs.25,000/-. As such the order passed by the District Commission is hereby set aside and accordingly the order passed by the District Commission is modified. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:-
O R D E R
The appeal is disposed off with the modification.
The impugned order dated 22-11-2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mysuru in CC.No.61/2021 is modified as under;
The Opposite Party/Appellant is directed to complete the entire uncompleted works within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and execute the sale deed by giving possession within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Further Opposite Party /Appellant is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.2.00 lakhs within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. If the Opposite Party/Appellant failed to comply the above order within 30 days, the appellant is directed to refund the entire amount paid by the respondent/complainant with interest @ 12% per annum on the said amount till realization.
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as Concerned District Commission.
Member Judicial Member
