Kerala

StateCommission

CC/15/41

SUNIL KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S ARTECH REALTORS - Opp.Party(s)

C S RAJAMOHAN

28 Oct 2016

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

SISUVIHAR LANE, VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

CC NO. 41/2015

JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2016

PRESENT

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATH ALI: PRESIDENT

 

SHRI.V.V. JOSE                                          : MEMBER

 

COMPLAINANTS

 

1.      Sunil Kumar,

          S/o. Babuchandran Pillai, Flat No.8D,

          Artech Take Castle,

          Kankath Junction,

          Thirumullavaram P.O.,

          Kollam, Pin – 691012

          President, Representing Artech Lake

          Castle Owners Association,

          Kankathu Junction, Thirumullavaram P.O.,

          Kollam- 691012.

 

2.      Aji Chandran,

          S/o. K.J. Chandrasekharan Nair,

          Flat No. 9C, Artech Lake Castle,

           Kankath Junction,

          Thirumullavaram P.O.,

          Kollam, Pin – 691012

          Secretary,

 Artech Lake Castle Owners Association,

          Kankathu Junction, Thirumullavaram P.O.,

          Kollam- 691012.

 

         

 

 

3.      Sivadasan Pandikasala,

          S/o. K. Nanu, Flat No.13 F,

          Artech Lake Castle,

           Kankath Junction,

          Thirumullavaram P.O.,

          Kollam, Pin – 691012

          Joint Secretary,

 Artech Lake Castle Owners Association,

          Kankathu Junction, Thirumullavaram P.O.,

          Kollam- 691012.

 

          (By Adv: Sri.Sunil Narayanan & Sri. Rajmohan.C.S.)

 

                                                                                                Vs.

 

OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

1. M/s. Artech Realtors Pvt. Ltd.,

          Registered Office at TC 15/1453,

          A1. R. Road, Vazhuthakkadu,

          Thiruvananthapuram,

          Pin-695003. R/by its Managing Director

          T.S. Asok, S/o. Thankappan,

          TC 4/248-5, Govindam, Gokulam Jn,

          Kuravankonam, Thiruvananthapuram

          Pin – 695003.  Now functioning at Artech  House,

          TC 24/2014 (1), Near Taj Vivanta,

          Thycaud, Thiruvananthapuram,

          Kerala – 695014.

 

2. T.S. Asok, S/o. Thankappan,

          TC 4/248-5, Govindam, Gokulam Jn,

          Kuravankonam, Thiruvananthapuram

          Pin-695003, Managing Director,

          M/s. Artech Realtors Pvt. Ltd.

 

 

         

         

 

JUDGMENT

 

SHRI.V.V. JOSE          : MEMBER

          The above complaint is filed under section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The 1^st opposite party is doing the business of building constructions in the name and style M/s. Artech Realtors Pvt. Ltd.  The 2^nd opposite party is the managing director of the 1^st opposite party.  The three complainants are office bearers of an association of forty four purchasers who purchased the apartments in the residential complex constructed by the opposite parties named “Samrudhi Lake Castle” later changed as “Artech Lake Castle” in Kollam west village, in Survey No. 6902 and 6904 in resurvey No.118/1, 118/2, 45 in block No.288.  The complainants purchased the apartments believing the offers and proposed amenities and facilities in the brochure.  The opposite parties are bound to provide a proper sewage treatment plant, borewell, intercom, Door access system, return of deposits to association, removal and pavement of broken tiles, fire fighting equipment, Garbage disposal unit, painting works due to damage caused by construction, original approval, sanctions, drawing of the entire building covering plumbing, electrical, lifts, generators, and other equipments.  All the works stated above would cost Rs.50,00,000/-.  The expense required for treatment plant with a capacity of 39600 Lrs i.e. 900 per day for each apartment comes to Rs.15,00,000/-.  Rs.6,00,000/- is required for a borewell of 400 feet depth.  The fixation of intercom requires Rs. 2,00,000/-.  Rs. 2,00,000/- is required for door access system.  Rs.6,00,000/-  has to be returned to the association which was collected and kept by the opposite parties from each purchaser.  Rs.2,00,000/- is needed for removal and pavement of broken tiles.  Fire fighting equipments needs Rs.2,00,000/-.  For garbage disposal unit needs Rs.5,00,000/-.  Painting works need Rs.10,00,000/-.   It comes a total of Rs.50,00,000/-.  All the above things were notified and requested to carryout by the opposite party by e-mail, directly, and even over phone.  But the opposite parties never responded.  According to the complainants opposite parties did not provide the necessary parking spaces for the vehicles of the apartment owners.  The sewage treatment tanks constructed by the opposite parties in the access way is filled with waste water.  According to the complainants the opposite parties are liable to compensate the apartment owners for the agony caused to them for the non-providing of promises, services and facilities.  The shortage of parking area is unbearable.  The opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.48,00,000/- as compensation for the above short falls.  Hence this complaint is for a direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.50,00,000/- to complete the work of the apartments with agreed amenities and Rs.48,00,000/- as compensation for the agony and hardships suffered  by the owners of the apartments due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of opposite parties.  They further prayed for a direction to provide required parking area, children’s play area, drivers’ dormitory, guest suite, cyber corner and card room.  They also prayed for a direction to provide original approvals, sanctions, drawing of the entire building covering plumbing, electrical, lifts, generators etc. and cost of the proceedings.

          2.      After admission of the complainant notice was served on both opposite parties.

          3.      On 04/0-9/2015 Adv: Sri. Kalkura appeared for opposite parties, but never filed vakkalath or version.

          4.      On 07/01/2016 this Hon’ble Commission appointed Mr. Moses Antoney as expert commissioner, to ascertain facts in the complaint.  The opposite party never filed any objection to the report of the commissioner, even though directed.

          5.      Complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and Exts. A1 to A12 were marked.  Ext. A1 is a colour brochure published by opposite parties.  Ext.A2 is the copy of the registration certificate of the apartment owners association.  Ext.A3 is copies of communications with opposite parties and minutes of joint discussion. Ext.A4 (a) and 4 (b) is copy of quotation for CCTV from the Megna Systems and Electronics.  Ext.A5 is copy of quotation for supply and installation of Grid Solar Power Plant.  Ext.A6 is the quotation for borewell.  Ext.A7 is the copy of quotation for maintenance of fire fighting system.   Ext.A8 is the copy of offer for manual operated and diesel burner for Rs.3,50,000/-.  Ext.A9 is quotation for supply of DG set from 5KVA to 2000 KVA.  Ext.A10 is the copy of offer evaluation of sewage treatment plant.  Ext.A11 is the copy of letter of show cause notice from Kerala State Pollution Control Board.  Ext.A12 is the estimate for the proposed rectification and balance work.

          6.      It is seen that the owners of the flats made an association of their own and it is registered also.  Ext.A2 proves the same.  The commission report shows that the flats are not completed as per the agreement.  The complainant has filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and marked 12 documents to prove their case.  But the opposite party, though appeared through a counsel, never cooperated with the proceedings.  They didn’t filed vakkalath, version and objection to commission report.  The Hon’ble Commission has set exparte the opposite parties.

          7.      Having been received the full amount of consideration and failed to discharge their bounden obligation, as per agreement, which amounts to clear deficiency of service.  We have no hesitation to find that the opposite party utterly failed in discharging the duties as per agreement and has committed breach of contract and it amounts to unfair trade practice also.  We find the case in favour of the complainant and against opposite parties.

          8.      Having been found that the opposite parties committed deficiency of service by not completing the construction as per the agreement, the opposite parties are liable to complete the works.  Hence we find the complainant’s case of non-completion is genuine and complainants are entitled for relief.

          9.      Hence we direct the opposite parties to pay amount of Rs.50,00,000/- to the complainants association to complete and maintain the remaining works of the flats.  The complainants are also entitled to get a compensation for mental agony etc. to a tune of Rs.2,00,000/- and also cost of Rs.10,000/- for this proceedings.

          10.    We further direct the opposite parties to provide required parking facilities, supply original approvals, sanctions, drawing of the entire building covering, plumbing, electrical, lifts and generators, children’s play area, drivers dormitory, guest suit, cyber corner and card room to the residential complex of the complainants.

          In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties  to pay an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs) to the complainants to complete the remaining works of the flats.  We further direct the opposite parties to provide the required parking facilities to the apartment owners and also to provide the original approvals, sanctions, drawing of the entire building covering plumbing, electrical, lifts, generators, children’s (kids) play area, drivers dormitory, guest suite, cyber corner and card room to the residential complex of the complainants as per the agreement. The complainants are entitled to a compensation for mental agony to a tune of Rs.2,00,000/- and also cost of Rs.10,000/- for this proceedings.

 

V.V. JOSE          : MEMBER

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATH ALI       : PRESIDENT

  APPENDIX

List of witness for the complainant

 

Nil.

 

Exhibits for the complainant

Ext.A1        - The colour brochure published by opposite parties.

 

Ext.A2        - The copy of the registration certificate of the apartment

                      Owners association.

 

Ext.A3        - Copies of communications with opposite parties and minutes

                             of joint discussion.

 

Ext.A4(a)  &

Ext.A 4(b) - Copy of quotation for CCTV from the Megna Systems and

                    Electronics.

 

Ext.A5        - Copy of quotation for supply and installation of Grid Solar

                       Power plant.

 

Ext.A6        - Quotation for borewell.

 

Ext.A7        - The copy of quotation for maintenance of fire fighting system.

 

Ext.A8        - The copy of offer for manual operated and diesel burner for

                             Rs. 35,000/-

 

Ext.A9        - Quotation for supply of DG set from 5KVA to 2000 KVA.

 

Ext.A10      - Copy of offer evaluation of sewage treatment plant.

 

Ext.A11      - Copy of letter of show cause notice from Kerala State

                       Pollution control board.

 

Ext.A12      - The estimate for the proposed rectification and balance work.

 

 

 

 

 

List of witnesses for the opposite party

 

Nil.

 

Exhibits for the opposite party

Nil

 

V.V. JOSE          : MEMBER         

 

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATH ALI       : PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

nb

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

KERALA STATE CONSUMER

 DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

SISUVIHAR LANE, VAZHUTHACADU,

 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

 

CC NO. 41/2015

JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2016

 

nb