Andhra Pradesh

StateCommission

FA/1386/08

M/S SAI MITRA CONSTRUCTIONS - Complainant(s)

Versus

MR.K.VIJAYA RAMA RAJU - Opp.Party(s)

M/S S.SHRAVAN KUMAR

17 Dec 2008

ORDER

 
First Appeal No. FA/1386/08
(Arisen out of Order Dated null in Case No. of District Hyderabad-II)
 
1. M/S SAI MITRA CONSTRUCTIONS
REP.BY ITS PARTNERS K.V.N.BHASKER AND D.S.RAVI SEKHAR 14-76, RAM NILAYAM P AND T COLONY, DSNR.
Andhra Pradesh
2. D.S.RAVI SEKHAR
R/O 44-B, ESWARIPURI COLONY, SAINIKPURI.
SECUNDERABAD
ANDHRA PRADESH
3. K.V.N.BHASKER
PLOT NO.79, SAIBABA OFFICERS COLONY, SAINIKPURI.
SECUNDERABAD
ANDHRA PRADESH
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. MR.K.VIJAYA RAMA RAJU
FLAT NO.204, SAI MITRAS SAVITHRI RESIDENCY, TILAKNAGAR, HYD.
HYDERABAD
Andhra Pradesh
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

BEFORE THE A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

ATHYDERABAD.

 

F.A. 1386/2008 against C.C. 912/2007, Dist. Forum-II,Hyderabad 

 

Between:

 

1. M/s. Sai Mitra Constructions

14-76, Ram Nilayam,

P&T Colony,

Dilsukhnagar

Rep. by its Partners

K.V.N. Bhasker &

D. S. Ravi Sekhar.

 

2. K.V.N. Bhasker

S/o. Seshagiri Rao

Age: 35 years,

Plot No. 79,

Saibaba Officers Colony

Sainikpuri, Secunderabad.

 

3. D. S. Ravi Sekhar

S/o. D. Subbaravulu

Age: 35 years,

R/o. 44-B, Eswaripuri Colony

Sainikpuri, Secunderabad.                                                                                               

And

K. Vijaya Rama Raju

S/o. Late K. Venkata Raju

Age: 37 years,

Flat No. 204,

Sai Mitra’s Savithri Residency

Tilaknagar,Hyderabad.                                                                                                

Counsel for the Appellants:                       

Counsel for the Resp:                                

         

QUORUM:

              

&

                                     

                                     

WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND EIGHT

 

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

 

                                                          

 

           

 

 

 

 

                                collected,   

                   40 sft   

 

 

 

 

 

            

         

                     the appellants to get these defects rectified 

 

          either the facts       

          

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

          nd    By    and A12.      and noted the following defects:

 

1. 

 main door. The observations also made by the Engineer

 photos were taken.

 

2.

 

3.

4.      

5.      

stone. Cracks were observed in marble stone.

6.      

7.      

observed.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12. 

and fixed the new door on his own costs.

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An engineer estimated these works at Rs. 2,07,500/-.   

 

Since the Dist. Forum did not consider the estimates given by the engineer nor compensation was awarded basing on it, we do not see any prejudice to the appellants.     there was no denial that defects pointed out by the commissioner were not there.       

 

We do not see any merits in the appeal.   

 

   

         

                                     

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.