BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM (UNDER CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986), MEDAK AT SANGAREDDY
Present: Sri Mekala Narsimha Reddy, M.A.,LL.B.,
P.G.D.C.P.L. Male Member
Smt Meena Ramanathan, B.Com., Lady Member
Monday, the 2nd day of August, 2010
CC.No. 27 of 2009
Between:
K. Sudhakar, President of
Brindavan Residency Flat Owners Welfare Association,
Society Regd. No. 487/2008, Off: Flat No. G-9,
Brindavan Residency, Brindavan Colony,
Ameenpur, Beeramguda, Medak District ….. Complainant
And
M/s Premier Contractors,
H.No. 6-8-238/1, Nalgonda ‘X’ Roads,
Kaladera New Malakpet,
Hyderabad.
Represented by its partners:
2. Mohd. Rizwanuddin Farooqui,
Aged about 32 years,
S/o Minhajuddin Farooqui,
Occ: Business,
R/o H.No. 3-1-278, Zindatilismath Building,
Kachiguda, Nimboliadda, Hyderabad.
3. Mohd. Owaisuddin Farooqui,
Aged about 38 years,
S/o Minhajuddin Farooqui,
Occ: Business,
R/o H.No. 3-1-278, Zindatilismath Building,
Kachiguda, Nimboliadda, Hyderabad.
4. Abdul Suboor Khan,
Aged about 43 years, S/o Rasheed Khan,
Occ:Business, R/o 3-6-119, Himayathnagar,
Hyderabad. ...Opposite parties
This case came up for final hearing before us on 30.07.2010 in the presence of complainant in person and Sri. Sharath Kumar, Advocate for opposite parties No. 1 to 4, upon hearing arguments of both sides, on perusing the record and having stood over for consideration till this day, this forum delivered the following
O R D E R
(Per Smt. Meena Ramanathan, Lady Member)
This complaint is filed Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to seeking direction against the opposite parties to provide all the amenities sought in the complaint and also to pay compensation of Rs.8,40,000/-; to pay damages of Rs. 50,000/- and any other relief or reliefs.
The averments in the complaint in brief are as follows:
1. The complainant is the President of society registered under Societies Act with registration No. 487/2008 having its office at Brindavan Residency, Brindavan Colony, Ameenpur, Beeramguda, Medak District. All the flat owners numbering (42) of Brindavan Residency have become members of complainant’s society and complainant is its President elect.
The all the members of complainant society purchased semi-fineshed flats in the apartment promoted by the opposite parties. The opposite parties No. 2 to 4 are the partners of the firm ‘PREMIER CONTRACTORS’ and they commenced construction of ‘Brindavan Residency’ consisting of ground floor + 2 floors consisting of 42 flats in Ameenpur village. The opposite parties offered for sale of flats and complainant members purchased the flats entering into agreements. The opposite parties agreed to provide all amenities and facilities as mentioned in their brochure within one year. All the members of complainant paid total consideration and registered the flats in their favour by the year end of 2007. The complainant members occupied their flats. The opposite parties are having more than 6-00 acres of land adjacent to apartment and also have their own site in front of the main gate of the apartment where there office is located. The opposite parties promised to dig two bore-wells at any place over 6-00 acres land and would supply water uninterruptedly to the flats. The opposite parties took signatures of some of the members of complainant society on blank papers. Though more than 18 months have elapsed, the opposite parties did not take cre to provide drinking water making the flat owners to suffer. The opposite parties did not attend the left over works too. As a result of which, the complainant members are purchasing water through tankers, paying huge monies. The opposite parties collected additional sum from the members of complainant society towards additional plinth area under compelling circumstances. The opposite parties agreed to provide the below mentioned amenities but failed to.
1. Bore well water supply through the taps to all flats.
2. Drinking water supply through the taps to all flats.
3. Flats ownership transfer in the records of Ameenpur Panchayat.
4. Ownership transfer in the electricity records.
5. Permanent fixation of water supply pipelines with G.I. Material instead of PVC temporary lines.
6. Two wheelers parking area demarcation.
7. Erection of two lifts with the capacity of 4 persons in each.
8. Cement plastering of outside walls of the flats.
9. Ventilators should be fitted with glasses.
10. Ceiling of electrical cable boxes along with corridor walls.
11. Flats hand over to the owners with complete provisions of all facilities as per the agreement and as per the quality as promised in the brochure.
12. To hand over singed blank stamp papers and blank cheques to the respective flat owners.
13. To provide office room for Brindavan Residency Flat owners Welfare Association, in the apartment.
14. Quality wash basins and quality latrine seats in the bath rooms.
15. Interior O.B.D. Exterior Ace. Enamel paints with luppam finish to doors and windows.
The complainant society issued notice to the opposite parties on 25.09.2008 but returned the same and failed to comply with the request. That the opposite party kept the placement for lift open without any cover; also kept the electric panel boards and earth pits in ground floor open and there is imminent danger for the children. There are leakages in the slab and walls. All these acts of the opposite parties amounts to negligence and deficiency of service, hence the present complaint is filed the above reliefs.
The opposite parties No. 1 to 4 resisted the claim of the complainant by filing a counter jointly to the following effect:
2. Opposite parties No. 1 to 4 jointly filed counter stating that theirs is a partnership firm and they took up the construction of apartment called “Brindavan Residency” with ground floor + 4 floors, consisting in all 74 flats over an area of 1456.33 square yards at Ameenpur Village. Issuing of brochure is admitted. That the flat owners of complainant society represented that they belong to middle –class community and they are prepared to buy the flats with lesser amenities provided the costs is reduced. The opposite parties accepted their proposal and entered into individual agreements with each of the flat owners agreeing to compromise on some aspects. Later, the opposite parties executed sale deeds in their favour as per revised specifications. Later, the opposite parties executed sale deeds in their favour as per revised specifications. That the opposite parties are providing the water through two bore wells and also supplying ‘Mangeera’ drinking water once in a week to all the flat owners. The opposite parties hav also borne the electricity charges in respect of common areas like corridors, lifting of bore water through motors, supply from bore wells, maintenance charges and watchman’s salary. As per the sale deeds once the association is formed, it is the responsibility of the association to maintain the common amenities by collecting necessary maintenance charges from individual flat owners. Though association is formed as early as 21.07.2008, they did not come forward to take-up the responsibility. When the opposite parties refused to provide the amenities, they threatened to approach the forum and accordingly filed the present complaint. The vendees are under an obligation to bear all the demands raised by APSEB towards transformers and accessories, service connection charges, water works and security deposit, etc. Regarding supply of Manjeera water, the opposite parties gave provision for it and it is for the association to pay necessary security deposit to the water works department and get connection. These connections could not be given to the flats as adequate Manjeera water facility has not reached the Ameenpur Grama Panchayat to cater to the needs of whole Grama Panchayat. The members of the Association are resorting the black mailing tactics. The complainant is mischievous, misconceived, irrelevant and the same deserves no consideration. If the members of complainant society are aggrieved, the course open to them is to go to a civil court and sue that builder for damages. The dispute raised by the complainant does not come under the consumer dispute at all. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.
3. Evidence affidavits of the complainant and opposite party No. 2 are filed. Exs. A1 to A10 are marked on behalf of the complainant. No documents are marked in opposite parties. Complainant filed chief affidavit to treat Written arguments. Oral arguments of both sides heard. Perused the record.
4. The point for consideration is whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties NO. 1 to 4, if so, to what relief the complainant is entitled to?
There is no dispute that the members of complainant society are the flat owners of ‘Brindavan Residency’. It is also not in dispute that the sale deeds are executed in favour of the flat owners. The only dispute that remains before this forum is that the amenities as stated by the complainants are not provided in the apartment. In support of their claim, the complainant filed a petition seeking appointment of commission to inspect the physical features in the apartment, which was allowed and on filing report by the Advocate-commissioner, the opposite parties herein filed R.P. No. 71/2009 against I.A.No. 60/2009 on the file of this forum, Before the A.P. State Commission. The same is allowed by the Honourable A.P. State Commission dismissing the orders passed in I.A. No. 60/2009.
Ex.A1 is the photocopy of agreement of sale executed by M/s Premier contractor, represented through its partner in favour of Rajesh Kumar vazza. Ex. A2 is the brochure issued by opposite parties. Ex.A3 is the photocopies of the returned postal covers. Ex.A4 is the photocopy of notice put to opposite parties by the complainant society. Ex.A5 are the photocopies of postal receipts. Ex.A6 is photocopy of certificate of Registration of the complainant society. Ex.A7 is the photocopy of the aims and objects of the society. Ex. A8 is the photocopy of the extract of the minutes of the complainant’s society. Ex. A9 are the (26) photos showing works left over by the opposite parties in the apartment and Ex.A10 is the (78) receipts showing payment made towards drawing of water through outsourcing.
As against the above documents, nothing is exhibited by the opposite parties to disprove the claim of complainant society. Ex.A2 clearly contemplates the provision of 2 lifts for 4 persons apart from other provisions. Though the opposite parties contented that they provided water supply line for drinking purpose, nothing is brought on record to disprove the claim of complainant. Though it is alleged that water is supplied through two bore wells, no documents are filed in proof of the same. It is also not stated whether the bore wells are dug within the premises of the apartment or outside. Ex.a9 photos exposes the laches on the part of the opposite parties which were promised in Ex.A2 brochure. Ex.A10 receipts show that the complainant members are drawing water through outsourcing paying huge monies. If at all the opposite parties provided the water through bore well. There is no whisper from the opposite parties as regards to left over electric conduits over the switch boards. In the specifications mentioned in Agreement of sale, it was agreed upon by the opposite parties to provide the ventilators fitted with glass; providing of concealed electric wiring; sufficient scooter parking, etc. Through Ex.A2 brochure the opposite parties made publicity of their salient features wherein it is mentioned that separate sump and over head tank for bore water and municipal water with abundant water supply through bore and municipal water along with 2 lifts 4 passengers each in addition to the specifications that are mentioned in agreement of sale. With these attractive salient features, the opposite parties lured the complainant’s members to purchase the flats and now they cannot repudiate there premises and say that the members have to obtain connection for water supply. The poor members shall not suffer for the laches on the part of the opposite parties. No family can live without adequate water and drinking water. It is a basic amenity that should be provided by any builder. Though the opposite parties made counter-allegations, they did not file any document to disprove the claim of complainant. On other hand, the complainant society exhibited Ex.A1 to A10 documents. Ex. A1 and Ex.A2 are the own documents of the opposite parties which have to be given credence to.
It is not the case of the opposite parties that the complainant members did not shell out the money. The opposite parties did not mention as to how many lifts are installed and whether they are functioning or not. Ex.A4 notice of the laches in the apartment. Ex.A3 shows that the Ex.A4 put by complainant society are either refused or not claimed by the opposite parties. Had the opposite parties really provided the amenities, they would have replied to the notice. The address shown on Ex.A3 covers is the same address shown in the array of cause title of the complaint. The opposite parties received the notice sent by this forum and engaged the services of their counsel to defend their claim. There is no denial from the opposite parties that the complainant society did not incur Rs.8,40,000/- towards drawing water to cater their needs. The contention of the opposite parties cannot be accepted for the above reasons. Had the opposite parties provided the amenities as promised, there was no necessity for the members of complainant society to knock the doors of this forum. Nothing is brought on record to show that the opposite parties paid the APSEB charges and on their demand to reimburse the same, the complainant society members threatened to file the complaint against them. This plea seems to have been taken only to dissuade the request of the complainant.
5. One of the photos in Ex. A9 show the exposure of electric conduits to air, posing threat and danger to the dwellers in the apartment. It was the promise of the opposite parties to provide concealed wiring, which disproves the same under Ex.A9 photo. If the contention of the opposite parties, for a moment, is accepted that they have provided all the amenities, there was no occasion for the complainant members to file the complaint with such allegations. Now-a-days it has become the general practice of the builders creating huge publicity of the ventures and luring the people to buy the flats. The innocent people should not suffer for the laches of the builder. Therefore, for the foregoing reasons and in lieu of the documents exhibited by complainant, we allow the complaint of complainant in part and direct the opposite parties as below:
a) to provide Bore well water and Manjeera drinking water on permanent basis through the taps to all the flats of ‘Brindavan Residency’
b) to co-operate the complainant members in transferring the ownership of flats in the records of Ameenpur Panchayat, as and when necessary.
c) To issue no objection certificate to concerned in favour of complainant society, for getting transfer of ownership in electricity department.
d) To fix the GI material instead of PVC temporary lines towards water supply pipelines, on permanent basis.
e) To demarcate the two wheeler parking area.
f) To provide bore-well on permanent basis within the apartment of ‘Brindavan Residency’ to lift and draw the water.
g) To erect two lifts with capacity of 4 persons in each.
h) To make plastering of outside walls with cement to avoid seepage and leakage of water.
i) To fix the glasses to the ventilators to all the flats of the apartment.
j) To conceal the electrical wires all over the apartment including corridor, cable boxes.
k) To replace the wash basins and WC (water closets) with good quality, wherever required.
l) To provide interior OBD exterior Ace. Enamel paints with luppam finish to doors and windows.
m) To reimburse the water charges of Rs.8,40,000/- to complainant society.
n) To pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for the deficient of services rendered.
o) To pay Rs.2,000/- towards costs of the complaint.
The opposite parties are directed to comply the above directions within a period of one month from the date of this order. The other reliefs of the complainant are disallowed.
Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum this 2nd day of August, 2010.
Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER LADY MEMBER
Copy to
1) The Complainant
2) The Opposite parties
3) Spare copy copy delivered to the Complainant/
Opposite parties On __________
