BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

DATED: 09.08.2023

PRESENT

HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESH : PRESIDENT

Mr.K.B SANGANNANAVAR             :         JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mrs. DIVYASHREE M            :         LADY MEMBER

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 519/2019

ORDER

BY HON’BLE JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESH,  PRESIDENT

01.   This is a consumer complaint filed by the complainant on 04.11.2019 under section 17 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite party seeking the following reliefs:-

(i) to direct the opposite party to remove the stack parking installed at B-551 which is causing hindrance to the complainant’s car parking,

(ii) to issue formal letter of allotment of two car parking spaces mentioning the slots properly,

(iii) to transfer khatha in the complainant’s and the registered owners name for which fees has already been taken one year back.

(iv) to pay Rs.30,00,000/- towards damages caused on account of deficiency in service and for the great deal of mental torture caused as well as costs of the proceedings and to pass such other reliefs as this Commission deems fit.

02.   The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that, the opposite party is a real estate company engaged in business of construction of residential apartments.  The complainant is in joint ownership of the apartment No.SH 106, Purva Seasons, Kaggadasapura Main Road, C.V. Raman Nagar, Bangalore, along with two other family members and he is filing this complaint in his capacity as the co-owner of the property.  The complainant with two other family members had booked flat No. SF-103 in PURVA SEASONS by paying booking amount of Rs.3,00,000/- on 21.09.2017 to the opposite party.  Subsequently complainant paid Rs.11,00,000/- to the opposite party vide cheque No.000169, dated: 15.10.2017 and sale agreement dated: 19.10.2017 was entered in to and modified agreement was also entered in to on 04.11.2017 with family members and the opposite party.  Thereafter when complainant and his family members visited the premises, he came to know that, the said flat was being used as service room for the staff and there were materials dumped and it was quite evident that the flat cannot be handed over and therefore complainant requested the marketing executive Mr. Shijil for cancellation of the agreement and sought for refund of the amount.  The Marketing Executive asked the complainant to visit the flat in H block which is being as a model flat and interiors were being done by Purva Streaks which is part of the opposite party’s business.  After negotiations complainant and his family members agreed to purchase SH 106 and sale agreement was modified by adding flat No. SH 106 in the place of SF 103.  Based on the assurance of the opposite party the complainant along with his wife had sold their existing flat No.208 situated at Hoysala Nagar, Bangalore.  Thereafter opposite party failed to deliver the possession of the flat and once again agreed to deliver vacant possession of the flat No. SH 106 on or before 08.01.2018 but disagreed to register the flat.  The complainant had fixed house warming ceremony of the apartment on 18.01.2018 and had invited all the family members and friends, but in the meantime from 08.01.2018 the complainant visited opposite party’s office, but opposite party refused to give possession.  Finally on 15.01.2018 on payment of entire consideration complainant and his family had received the possession of the flat.  On receipt of the keys of the flat, the complainant came to know that, the work was not completed and the broken tiles have not been replaced and the utility room and balconies were not painted.  In this regard complainant sent several emails, but all went in vain.  Ms. Manisha Patra official of opposite party had told that, they offer additional car parking without any additional cost as compensation.  Finally on 29.11.2018 sale deed was executed in favour of the complainant and his family members.  After registration complainant made several discussions with the opposite party’s officials Mr. Prem, Ms. Manisha and Ms. Sumathy C vide email dated: 12.12.2018 and Ms. Sumathy C had clearly conveyed the allotment of two car parking slots to the complainant and his family numbering B621 and B651 and also conveyed that, a formal letter of allotment would be issued after the transfer of BESCOM meter.  Complainant approached BESCOM for meter transfer and he came to know that, it could be transferred only after khatha transfer.  At the time of booking complainant had paid Rs.17,000/- to the opposite party for khatha transfer, but opposite party had not taken any steps to transfer Khatha due to which BESCOM meter cannot be transferred which resulted to non issuance of formal letter of allotment for the car parking spaces.  Further when complainant tried to park his car at slot No. B651 which was previously allotted, he came to know that, it was already allotted to somebody else and Mr. Nikhith Pawar, opposite party official informed vide email dated: 22.02.2019 that, B-552 and B-621 car parking slots were allotted to the complainant, but complainant faced lot of trouble parking in B-621 and he asked for alternative car parking space for which the complainant was asked to park in G-269 and B-641 assuring that, meanwhile they would allot alternate suitable parking spaces.  The complainant started parking in B641 instead of B621 and B552 which was allotted as per records.  Complainant sought for rectification of sale deed vides email dated: 14.06.2019 to include car parking spaces.  On 30.09.2019 complainant was shocked to note that, a stack parking space was installed in B551 which made it impossible for the complainant to park at B552 and Ms. Manisha Patra promised to revert back by Thursday.  On 04.10.2019 complainant received an email from the opposite paty stating that, only one car parking had been allotted to him as per sale deed and also sought additional cost.  There is an inordinate delay in registering the flat which caused great loss to the complainant.  Moreover the flat was delivered without completion of the pending work.  The complainant is in possession of the apartment from 18.01.2018 and using two car parking spaces based on the allotments made.  The opposite party made the complainant to park his car worth of Rs.39,00,000/- in visitors car parking.  The complainant had purchased a flat worth of Rs.1,32,00,000/- and paid an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- towards interiors and Rs.9,00,000/- towards stamp duty and registration charges and without completing the work flat was handover and when questioned opposite party offered an additional car parking.  Hence complainant issued legal notice to the opposite party on 04.10.2019, but opposite party failed to comply. 

03.   In the amendment carried out the complainant’s allegation is that, Ms. Sumathy opposite party official offered additional car parking space at an additional cost vide email dated: 05.11.2019.  Despite that, the opposite party failed to allot car parking area hence complainant contacted land owner of the entire building and the land owner vide his letter dated: 25.11.2019 allotted an additional car parking after receiving Rs.4,50,000/- in the name of complainant’s wife who is also the joint owner of the flat.  One Mrs. Usha Sridhar owner of SH-102 had informed the opposite party to update the list of her car parking B-552 which she had recently purchased as an additional slot from opposite party.  The complainant received email dated: 20.10.2020 that, the car parking allotted to him was sold to a third person.  The official of the opposite party called complainant and offered same parking to be re-allotted if complainant pays Rs.98,000/- and complainant objected for the same.  The opposite party had threatened to levy a penalty of Rs.1,000/- per day if complainant parks the car in B-552 as the same was sold to another person by the opposite party.  The opposite party issued legal notice dated: 27.11.2020 threatening that, penalty of Rs.1,000/- would be imposed if complainant park his car in B-552 from 01.11.2020. 

04.   Though counsel for opposite party appeared and in-spite of grant of sufficient opportunity   did not choose to file version, hence version of opposite party taken as not filed. 

05.   In order to prove his case complainant filed his affidavit evidence along with documents and the counsel appearing for opposite party had filed affidavit evidence of one Sri. B. Praveen Kumar, an authorized signatory of opposite party along with documents.   Both parties to the complaint have filed their respective written arguments.

06.   During the course of arguments counsel for complainant addressed that, in-spite of making payment of full consideration to the opposite party there was an inordinate delay of 10 months in registering the flat in favour of complainant and most of the works were incomplete.  Initially opposite party had offered two car parking slots later allotted only one car parking area.  Though opposite party received a sum of Rs.17,700/- from complainant for transfer of Khatha the same was not been done.  There is no clarity that which car parking area was allotted to the complainant from the opposite party.  Per contra, counsel for opposite party addressed that, at ink page-18 in the Agreement of Sale at schedule C it is clearly mentioned that, A Three Bedroom apartment will come one covered car parking space.  At ink Page-31 at Para No.4 the complainant had undertaken that, he examined/inspected and fully satisfied with the construction of the schedule-C flat etc.,.  The complainant has not paid the fee pertaining to Khatha transfer.

07.   Perused the complaint, affidavit evidences submitted by both the parties along with documents and written arguments.  It is admitted fact that, as per the Agreement of Sale dated: 19.10.2017 the complainant with his family members had purchased flat No. SH-106 from the opposite party by making payment of total sale consideration of Rs.1,50,46,556/-.  Now the main allegation of the complainant is that, in-spite of making payment of full consideration to the opposite party there was an inordinate delay of 10 months in registering the flat in favour of complainant by the opposite party and most of the works were incomplete.  The further allegation made by the complainant is that, in-spite of receiving Rs.17,700/- from the complainant towards transfer of Khatha, the opposite party had failed to transfer the same in favour of the complainant and due to which BESCOM meter cannot be transferred in favour of complainant which resulted to non issuance of formal letter of allotment for the car parking space from the opposite party.  Further complainant urged that, in-spite of making several email correspondences and oral requests/submissions made by the complainant there is no clarity that, which car parking slot/area was allotted to the complainant from the opposite party’s side.  On perusing the documents and the email correspondences placed before us, no doubt it corroborates the allegations made by the complainant.  It is very pertinent to note that, due to the failure on the part of the opposite party in respect of transfer of Khatha in favour of complainant though it had received Rs.17,700/- from the complainant’s side at the time of booking itself it had failed to do its obligations which resulted to non-transfer of BESCOM meter and non issuance of formal letter for allotment of parking space.  Due to the said act of the opposite party the complainant had suffered lot of inconvenience and mental agony and made him to purchase additional car parking space from the land owner of the apartment building by making payment of Rs.4,50,000/-. 

08.   In view of the above discussions, we are of the considered view that, the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and we feel it is just and proper to direct the opposite party to clarify the car parking space of the complainant, whether it had allotted B-552 or B-621 to the complainant within three months from the date of the order, failing which the opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant.  Accordingly we proceed to allow the complaint in part.

09.   Further OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses.

10.   Provide copy of this order to both parties.

LADY MEMBER      JUDICIAL MEMBER            PRESIDENT

Knmp*