Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

cc/150/2013

B. Savithri - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s R.K. Township Developers Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

D. Chandra Rao

27 Aug 2014

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:12-06-2013 

                                                                                                Date of Order:27-08-2014

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                             VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:      

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

     President (FAC)  

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

                                    Male Member

 

                             Wednesday, the 27^th day of August, 2014.

                             CONSUMER CASE No.150/2013

Between:-

Smt. B. Savithri, W/o B.S.P. Sastry,

Hindu, aged 40 years, resident of

D.No.4-52-8/1, Lawson’s Bay Colony,

Visakhapatnam-17.

                                                                                        ….. Complainant

And:-

M/s. R.K. Township Developers Private Ltd.,

Reptd. by its Chairnam-cum-Managing Director,

Office situated at D.No.16-55, Old Gajuwaka,

Visakhapatnam-26.

                                                                                           …  Opposite Party

                     

This case coming on 04.08.2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri K.V. Brahamam, Advocate for the Complainant and Sri R. Lakshmana Rao, Advocate for the Opposite Party and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

                                                ORDER

        (As per Smt. K. Saroja Honourable President (FAC)on behalfofthe Bench)

 

1.       The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant with a fond hope to acquire a home for her family joined in the housing scheme of the Opposite Party in a group by name       Ganapathi Enclave.    The Complainant paid Rs.500/- towards admission fee to the Opposite Party.   The Opposite Party had allotted Passbook No.101 and on the same day the Complainant paid Rs.50,000/-.   The Opposite Party issued a receipt bearing No.495 for the same.   The Complainant and the Opposite Party entered into the Sale Agreement dated 7.5.2012 to purchase a plot bearing No.9  an extent of 220 Sq. yards covered under S.No.190/50 under LP No.72/2008.   As per the said Sale Agreement, rate per sq. yard is Rs.2,400/-.   The Complainant agreed for the said rate and to that effect the Complainant had paid initial amount of Rs.50,000/- on 02.05.2012.   The Complainant had approached a Nationalized Bank with an intention to know that whether there is any loan facility to the plot bearing No.9 of Ganapathi Enclave.   The Complainant requested the Opposite Party to supply documents relating to VUDA Approval and link documents, land conversion certificate from concerned authority etc.    But the Opposite Party did not provide the same.   Then the Complainant issued a legal notice dated 18.4.2013 requesting the Opposite Party to refund the amount as paid by the Complainant towards initial amount.   The Opposite Party did not reply the same.    Hence, this complaint.

 

2.       a) to repay an amount of Rs.50,500/- (Rupees fifty thousand and five hundred only) to the Complainant together with interest @ 24% per annum from the date of payment i.e., 02.05.2012 till the date of realization;

          b) to pay Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) towards damages;

          c) to pay costs of this complaint of Rs.1,000/-; and

          e) for such other relief or reliefs as the Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case.

           

3.       The Opposite Party strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from its counter.   The Opposite Party has got approval of the layout plan No.72/2008 in the year 2008.   Whereas, the Complainant joined as a member in the above venture on 7.5.2012, the Opposite Party had completed all the legal formalities within stipulated time.   The Complainant is a defaulter.  The Opposite Party had invested huge amount in the above said manner for materialization of layout and incurred expenditure towards procurement of lands, layout developments. So the Opposite Party has no liability to pay any amount and other reliefs as prayed by the Complainant. 

 

4.       At the time of enquiry, both the Opposite Parties filed their affidavits as well as written arguments.   The Complainant filed Exs.A1 to A4 to support her contention.   No documents were marked for the Opposite Party.   Treated as heard in view of the written arguments filed by both parties.    

 

 

5.       ExA1 is the Cash Receipt issued by the Opposite Party in favour of B. Lalitha Sundari, D/o B.S.P. Sastri towards special installment + admission fee in total Rs.50,500/- dated 2.5.2012.   Ex.A2 is the Sale Agreement between the Complainant and the Opposite Party dated 7.5.2012.   Ex.A3 is the legal notice issued by the Complainant dated 18.4.2013 in favour of the Opposite Party.   Ex.A4 is the acknowledgement.

 

6.       Ex.A1 reveals that the Opposite Party issued a Cash Receipt in favour of Complainant’s daughter for Rs.50,000/- on 2.5.2012 towards special installment in the above venture. 

 

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 Party.  The Complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for? If so what an extent.

 

8.         After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that the Complainant paid Rs.50,500/- towards special installment  and admission fee for the plot in the above venture.   The Complainant paid the said amount in the year, 2012.   Though, the Opposite Party stated in their counter and also in the sale agreement that they had VUDA approval and L.P. No.72/2008.   But they did not produce any piece of evidence before this Forum regarding LP.   The Opposite Party fails to produce any document to show that they had developed the said venture.   It amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.   Hence, the Complainant is entitled to Rs.50,500/- some compensation with suitable interest and costs too.

 

9.       In the result, this Complaint is allowed directing the Opposite Party: 1) to pay an amount of Rs.50,500/- (Rupees fifty thousand and five hundred only) with interest 9% p.a. from the date of payment i.e., 02.05.2012 till the date of actual realization, and also to pay 2) a compensation of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) and 3) Costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One 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 the 27^th day of August, 2014.

Sd/-                                                                                              Sd/-

Male Member                                                                           President

                                     

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	02.05.2012	Cash Receipt for Rs.50,500/- issued by the OP to Complainant	Original
Ex.A02	07.05.2012	Sale Agreement	Original
Ex.A03	18.04.2013	Registered Legal Notice got issued by the Complainant’s counsel to the op	Office copy
Ex.A04	27.04.2013	Acknowledgement Card	Original

For the Opposite Party:-

                                                -Nil-

Sd/-                                                                                              Sd/-

Male Member                                                                              President