Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/2010/02

Smt Rajeshwari.M.R. W/o Ramachandra.T.M, Aged About 35 Years - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Krupa Developers - Opp.Party(s)

27 May 2010

ORDER


BEFORE THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMERS DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BANGALORE URBAN,Ph:22352624
No:8, 7th floor, Sahakara bhavan, Cunningham road, Bangalore- 560052.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/2010/02

Smt Rajeshwari.M.R. W/o Ramachandra.T.M, Aged About 35 Years
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

M/s Krupa Developers
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Anita Shivakumar. K 2. Ganganarsaiah 3. Sri D.Krishnappa

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

O R D E R SMT. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR. K, MEMBER 1. The brief grievance of the complainant is that complainant had accepted the offer of a site bearing No:94 measuring 30’ X 40’ in the layout formed by OP developer. As agreed by both parties they entered into an agreement dtd:14/10/2008 for the total sale consideration of Rs.4,80,000/- and the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.1,92,000/- as an advance amount to the OP. According to the agreement and assurances given by OP, OP was supposed to handover the said vacant property within 3 months from the date of agreement. But OP failed to do so and after lapse of 7 months OP sent a demand letter dated 05/05/2009 to the complainant for payment of 20% of total sale consideration. In the reply letter sent by the complainant 18/05/2009 to OP stated that complainant had lost hopes on assurance of OP and requested to refund his advance amount along with 18% interest. OP did not reply to the said letter of complainant. Complainant personally visited OP and requested to repay the given amount. OP neither registered the sale deed nor refunded his amount. Finally, complainant approached this forum to seek relief to his grievance and also prays to direct to refund Rs.1,92,000/- with 18% p.a. interest, Rs.1,00,000/- compensation for mental agony and cost. 2. Notices sent to two partners of the OP company, are returned with postal of “information delivered”, are considered as served. Both partners of OP were absent on the date of appearance. Hence OP’s placed exparte. 3. In the course of enquiry, complainant filed his evidence by way of affidavit, reiterating what is stated in the complainant. Hear arguments of GPA holder of complainant, who was in person and perused the records. 4. On perusal of the agreement produced reveal that both complainant and OP entered into an agreement of sales dated 14/10/2008 it was agreed between both the parties that total sale consideration of Rs.4,80,000/- towards the site bearing No:94 to be developed by OP. Complainant had paid Rs.1,92,000/- as an advance amount. OP also agreed to provide said property within 3 month from the date of agreement. Complainant submitted that OP has not come forward to perform his part of contact as agreed. After several request made by complainant after 7 months, OP sent a letter dated 05/05/2009 asking to pay 20% of total consideration. 5. OP has not kept up his assurance to act, despite that letter dated 18/05/2009. Complainant asked OP to refund his advance amount along with 18% interest. OP has not replied to complainant’s written requests and also not refunded his amount. 6. OP agreed to hand over site within, the agreed time, but he has neither handed over the site nor refunded the amount to the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service. Therefore, we are of the view that OP is liable to compensate the complainant by repaying his amount. 7. The OP inspite of opportunity given to him has remained absent. We do not find any reason to disbelieve the claim of the complainant. Hence we pass the following order. O R D E R Complaint is allowed. 1. Op is directed to pay Rs.1,92,000/- with interest @ 18% p.a. to the complainant from the date of payment till it is re-paid OP shall pay this amount within 45 days from this order. 2. Op shall pay cost of Rs.1000/- to the complainant. Dictated to the stenographer. Got it transcribed and corrected. Pronounced in the open forum on this the 27th May 2010. MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT




......................Anita Shivakumar. K
......................Ganganarsaiah
......................Sri D.Krishnappa