Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/360/2012

Goparaju Venkata Chalapathi Rao - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Amruthavarshini Constructions - Opp.Party(s)

U.S.V. Prasad

18 Feb 2015

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:05-11-2012 

                                                                                                Date of Order:18-02-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                             VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:

1.  Sri H. Ananda Rao, M.A., L.L.B.,

     President           

2. Smt K. Saroja, M.A. B.L.,

     Lady Member 

                                3. Sri C.V. Rao, M.A., B.L.,

                                     Male Member

 

                         Wednesday, the 18^th day of February, 2015.

                             CONSUMER CASE No.360/2012

Between:-

Sri Goparaju Venkata Chalapathi Rao,

S/o Sri G. Suryanarayana Murthy, Hindu,

aged 51 years, residing at Door No.50-39-10,

TPT Colony, Visakhapatnam-530 013.

                                                                                        ….. Complainant

And:-

1.M/s. Amruthavarshini Constructions, represented

   by its Partners :

1. Sri Latchireddy Sivaji, S/o Appa Rao, Hindu,

 aged 37 years, Door No. 57-4-36, Durganagar,

Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam.

ii)Sri Kotapati Ramana Reddy, S/o Venkatanarayana

Reddy, Hindu, aged 38 years, Door No. 57-4-36,

Durganagar, Kancharapalem, Visakhapanam.

2.Sri Latchireddy Sivaji, S/o Appa Rao, Partner,

   M/s. Amruthavarshini Constructions, Hindu, aged

   37 years, door No. 57-4-36, Durganagar,

   Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam.

3.Sri Kotapati Ramana Reddy, S/o Venkatanarayana

   Reddy, Partner, M/s. Amruthavarshini Constructions,

   Hindu, aged 38 years, Door No.57-4-36, Durganagar,

   Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam.

                                                                                          …  Opposite Parties

                     

This case coming on 19.01.2015 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri        U.S.V. Prasad and Sri P. Sukumar Rao, Advocates for the Complainant and Sri B. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

                                                ORDER

        (As per Smt. K. Saroja Honourable Lady Member on behalf of the Bench)

 

1.       The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant is the absolute owner of site measuring an extent of 225 Sq. yards in Plot No.4 covered by Survey No.41/1 of Chinagadili Village, situated in Ambedkarnagar, Arilova within limits of Grater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation which was acquired by him through two Registered Sale Deeds.   The Opposite Parties have approached the Complainant expressing its intention of construction of residential units flats and assured the Complainant to construct the same.   Accordingly Development Agreement coupled with General Power of Attorney dated 03.06.2010 was executed by the Complainant in favour of the Opposite Partt, 2010 and the same was registered before the Joint Sub-Registrar, Visakhapatnam vide document No.3240/2010.   The Complainant has agreed to entrust to the Opposite Parties, who has to construct and deliver entire first floor measuring 1600 Sft. in lieu of consideration of the total site.   Subsequently by virtue of Development Agreement coupled with General Power of Attorney, obtained a plan from GVMC  under B.A. No.12316/2010/ACP-I dated 29.10.2010 for construction of residential units/flats.   As per the Clause No.10 of the said deed, the Opposite Parties had to complete all the flats in all respects within 12 months with a grace period of 3 months from the date of approval of the plan and handover the entire first floor measuring 1600 Sft. in respect of the Complainant’s share.   After getting approval from the GVMC, the Opposite Parties started construction of residential units/flats, but they stopped finishing work outside and inside the apartment leaving flooring and other miscellaneous work such as providing the interiors, bathroom fittings etc.    As per the Development Agreement the Opposite Parties had to suppose to complete the entire construction on or before January, 2012, but they failed to complete the construction in time.     Inspite of many requests made by the Complainant, the Opposite Parties did not finish the works as per their Development Agreement.   Hence, this Complaint.

 

2.       a)  To direct the Opposite Parties to complete the construction of the entire first floor an extent of 1600 Sft. and handover the same within the time stipulated by this Forum;  

          b)  To direct the Opposite Parties to pay an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for causing inconvenience and severe mental agony to the Complainant by the Opposite Parties or deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties;  

          c) To direct the Opposite Parties to pay the costs of Rs.5,000/- to the Complainant;

          d) For such other reliefs that are deemed just in the circumstances of the case.

 

3. The 3^rd Opposite Party did not appear before this Forum.

 

          The 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties filed Vakalat but failed to file any counter as well as written arguments and documents.

         

4.       At the time of enquiry, the Complainant filed affidavit as well as written arguments to support his contention.   Exs.A1 to A3 are marked for the Complainant.    No documents were marked for the Opposite Parties.  Heard the Complainant.

 

5.       Ex.A1 is the Registered Development Agreement coupled with General Power of Attorney between the Complainant and the Opposite Parties dated 03.06.2010.   Ex.A2 is the Proceedings of the Commissioner; Grater Visakha Municipal Corporation dated 29.10.2010.  Ex.A3 are the Bunch of Photographs along with one CD. 

 

6.       The fact shown from Ex.A1 reveals that the Complainant and the Opposite Parties entered into Development Agreement and the Opposite Party has to complete the construction within 12 months with grace period of 3 months and also deliver the same to the Complainant within agreed period.   Ex.A2 reveals that the Opposite Parties has got proceedings from the Commissioner GVMC to construct the said flats which was agreed by the Opposite Parties 1 and 2.  

 

7.       The point that would arise for determination in the case is:-

Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.   Whether the Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

 

9.         After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that the  Complainant and the Opposite Parties entered into Development Agreement and the Opposite Parties have undertake to construct the flats within stipulated period.   But the Opposite Parties failed to complete the construction as per the Development Agreement dated 03.06.2010.   On 10.10.2014 after filing of this Complaint the Opposite Parties filed an undertaking memo stating that they have completed the internal part of the construction in respect of the Complainant’s flat and the Opposite Parties have to secure completion certificate and release mortgage from GVMC and also provide individual electrical connection of the flats within 2 months from today.   Though the Opposite Parties filed this memo on 10.10.2014, but till today they failed to file any memo regarding that all the works were finished which were due by them.    The Opposite Parties filed a memo but they failed to fulfill their promise, as per their Development Agreement dated 3.6.2010 it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.   So, the Complainant suffered a lot of mental agony by the acts of the Opposite Parties as they did not handover the entire constructed flats in favour of the Complainant within the agreed period as per Development Agreement.  So, the Complainant suffered a lot of mental agony from 2010 to till today.   We are of the considered opinion that the Opposite Parties filed an undertaking memo before this forum on 10.10.2014 that they will complete the construction and handover it to the Complainant as per their Development Agreement but they failed to do so.   As per the undertaking memo filed by the Opposite Parties, they had completed internal constructions of the Complainant’s flats, after issuing notice to the Complainant,  who endorsed as seen the notice, so the first relief asked by the Complainant is completed by the Opposite Parties as per undertaking memo dated 10.10.2014.    Hence, the Complainant is entitled to some compensation and costs too.

 

10.     In the result, this Complaint is allowed directing the Opposite Parties 1 to 3 to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) and costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the Complainant.   Time for compliance, one month from the date of this order.

Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this 18^th  day of February, 2015.

 

Sd/-                                                                                     Sd/-

President                                                                         Lady Member

                                     

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	03.06.2010	Registered Development Agreement coupled with General Power of Attorney between the Complainant and the Opposite Parties	Photo copy
Ex.A02	29.10.2010	Proceeding of the Commissioner, GVMC	Original
Ex.A03		Bunch (8) of Photos with one CD	Original

For the Opposite Parties:-                                    

                                     

                                                -Nil-

  Sd/-                                                                                          Sd/-

President                                                                                Lady Member