Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/266/2012

R.Ravi - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Chandan Housing - Opp.Party(s)

T.Srinivasaraghavan.

10 May 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 08.10.2012

                                                                          Date of Order : 10.05.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.266/2012

DATED THIS FRIDAY THE 10^TH DAY OF MAY 2019

                               

Mrs. R. Ravi,

S/o. Late. T. Rajan,

A-51, Doshi Gardens,

No.174, Arcot Road,

Vadapalani,

Chennai – 600 026.                                                        .. Complainant.                                                      

 

                                                                                              ..Versus..

1. M/s. Chandan Housing,

Represented by its Managing Partner

Mr. L. Uday Metha,

Jyothikunj, No.22, (Old No.62/2),

Burkit Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.

 

2. Mr. L. Uday Metha,

Partner,

M/s. Chandran Housing,

Jyothikunj, No.22, (Old No.62/2),

Burkit Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.

 

3. Mrs. U. Sumanlatha Metha,

W/o. Mr. L. Uday Metha,

Partner,

M/s. Chandran Housing,

No.62/2, Burkit Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017.  

 

4. Mr. Vijayarajan,

S/o. Mr. Varadan,

No.238, Indira Nagar,

Neyveli – 607 801.

 

5. Mrs. Anitha Vijayarajan,

W/o. Mr. Vijayarajan,

S/o. Mr. Varadan,

No.238, Indira Nagar,

Neyveli – 607 801.

 

6. Mr. V. Kumar,

S/o. Mr. Varadan,

No.238, Indira Nagar,

Neyveli – 607 801.                                              ..  Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant                  : M/s. T. Srinivasaraghavan & 

                                                                  Associates & others

Counsel for the opposite parties 1 to 3 : M/s. P. Ravichandran &                                                          

                                                                  another

Opposite parties 4 to 6                           : Dismissed on 11.07.2014

 

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to rectify the deficiencies and to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and hardship with 18% p.a. from the date of complaint till the date of actual payment with cost to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that the 2^nd opposite party approached the complainant and issued pamphlets stating that the opposite parties are developing the land in Bangalore by way of constructing multi-storied Apartment in the name ‘Chandan Residency’.  The complainant submits that the opposite parties explained and assured to provide all facilities mentioned in the pamphlet. Hence, the complainant and her husband decided to purchase 5 flats in his name, his wife’s name and HUF so that his entire family can settle in one building.  The complainant decided to purchase two flats in his name.  The 2^nd opposite party is the Power of Attorney holder and on behalf of all the opposite parties entered into a Joint Development Agreement dated:03.08.2009 with the 1^st opposite party represented by the 2^nd opposite party.  On good faith, the complainant along with her husband entered into the Sale Agreement dated:24.09.2007 to purchase two flats in the west wing measuring 2680 sq. ft. built-up area inclusive of balconies and utility space with 2 covered car parking spaces with undivided share of 688 sq. ft. in the total area of 7200 sq. ft.  Thereafter on 08.12.2009, the complainant entered into another Sale Agreement with the opposite parties 4 to 6 to purchase a flat bearing No.C1 on the Second Floor, West Wing measuring 1340 sq. ft. of the built up area inclusive of balconies and utitlity space with one covered car parking together with an undivided share of 315 sq. ft.  The complainant has paid an advance amount of Rs.50,000/- by way of cash at the time of signing the Agreement.  The balance amount of Rs.29,50,000/- was agreed to be paid in instalments in stages.  It was also agreed that the total sale consideration of Rs.30,00,000/- should be paid at the time of handing over the possession of apartment.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 did not honour their commitments, sold the above said apartments to the third parties.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 executed two separate Sale Deeds dated:25.03.2011 & 02.08.2011 for Flat Nos.B-3 measuring 1340 sq. ft. in the first floor with one car parking space in the basement together with UDS of land and another flat, bearing flat No.E2 in the fourth floor measuring 1255 sq. ft. with one car parking space in the basement together with 300 sq. ft. undivided share of land.  The act of the opposite parties as agreed and executed Sale Agreement for Flat Nos.A3 & A4 which was sold to the third parties without the knowledge of the complainant and executed sale deed for lesser area of different Apartment in Flat Nos.B-3 & E-2 of the same building which has caused great mental agony to the complainant. 

2.     The complainant submits that as per agreement, the agreed undivided share of land 688 sq. ft. i.e. 344 sq. ft. each flat was agreed to be conveyed, but under Sale Deed dated:25.03.2011 the opposite party conveyed only 315 sq. ft. of UDS for each flat.   The complainant submits that as per clause 13 of the sale agreement, specific car parking to be allotted to flat owner.   The complainant submits that evenafter repeated requests and demands and a lapse of 55 months, the opposite parties has not provided the following amenities  which had been advertised in the Pamphlet at the time of signing the Sale Agreement and committed deficiency in service which reads as follows:

• Jauzzi with steam bath.
• Multi Station Gym.
• Terrace Community Hall.
• Ample car park at Cellar.
• Health club.
• High Speed Lift
• Cable TV network.
• Telephone – online for each apartment with intercom facility.
• Power backup generator for common areas.
• Water supply BWSSB.  A network of pressure pumps for consistent water pressure.
• Rain water harvesting.
• Painting of external with premium quality ace paints.
• Doors with teakwood panelled main door polished, solid frames with molded panel doors for all doors and fittings.
• Windows – Australian Honne wood framed with shutters including grill work and glass.

   The act of the opposite parties 1 to 3 amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice which caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

3.      The brief averments in the written version filed by opposite parties 1 to 3 is as follows:

The opposite parties 1 to 3 specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite parties state that the agreement between parties entered at Bangalore.   The flat proposed to construct is also at Bangalore.  There is no cause of action at Chennai.  The opposite parties state that after due negotiation, the agreement was entered into between the complainant and the opposite parties into a sale agreement  dated:24.09.2007 the opposite party has agreed for construction of flats and handed over the same to the complainant.   Due to the change of mind of the complainant, the flat was changed.   The opposite parties state that the complainant conveniently suppressed the fact of full satisfaction and filed this case after purchasing two flats.   The claim of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony are imaginary and exorbitant.  The complaint filed by the complainant is unsustainable and there is no truth in it.  The complainant has not proved the deficiency in construction of the opposite parties.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties 1 to 3 and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed

4.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1 to 3 is filed and no document is marked on the side of the opposite parties 1 to 3.

5.      The points for consideration is :-

1. Whether the complainant entitled to get rectify the deficiencies as prayed for?

2. Whether the complainant to entitled to a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards mental agony along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. with cost as prayed for?

6.      On point:-

Both parties filed their respective written arguments.  Heard the complainant's Counsel also.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.  The learned Counsel for the complainant would contend that the 2^nd opposite party approached the complainant and issued pamphlets stating that the opposite parties are developing the land in Bangalore by way of constructing multi-storied Apartment in the name ‘Chandan Residency’.  Ex.A1 is the pamphlet.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite parties explained and assured to provide all facilities mentioned in the pamphlet. Hence, the complainant and her husband decided to purchase 5 flats to settle their entire family in one building.  The complainant decided to purchase two flats in his name.  The 2^nd opposite party is the Power of Attorney holder and on behalf of all the opposite parties entered into a Joint Development Agreement dated:03.08.2009 with the 1^st opposite party. On good faith, the complainant along with his wife entered into the Sale Agreement dated:24.09.2007 to purchase two flats in the west wing measuring 2680 sq. ft. build up area inclusive of balconies with 2 covered car parking spaces with undivided share of 688 sq. ft. in the total area of 7200 sq. ft.  Ex.A3 is the Sale Agreement.  Thereafter on 08.12.2009, the complainant entered into another Sale Agreement with the opposite parties to purchase a flat bearing No.C1 on the Second Floor, West Wing measuring 1340 sq. ft. of the built up area with an undivided share of 344 sq. ft. as per Ex.A4, Sale Agreement. The complainant paid an advance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- by cheque No.30292 dated:08.12.2009 at the time of signing the Agreement.  But the complainant has not filed any document to prove the same.  The balance amount of Rs.16,00,000/- was agreed to be paid in instalments every month Rs.1,00,000/- from January 2010 as per Ex.A4.  It was also agreed that the total sale consideration of Rs.17,00,000/- should be paid at the time of handing over the possession of apartment.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 did not honour their commitments, sold the apartments to the third parties.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 executed two separate Sale Deeds dated:25.03.2011 & 02.08.2011 for Flat No.B-3 super built-up area  measuring 1340 sq. ft. with UDS of 315 sq. ft. in the first floor with one car parking space in the basement for total consideration of Rs.12,79,200/- as per Ex.A5, Sale Deed.   Similarly, for Flat No.E2 super built-up area of 1255 sq. ft. with UDS of 300 sq. ft. in the fourth floor with one car parking space in the basement for total consideration of Rs.12,04,400/- as per Ex.A6, Sale Deed.  The act of the opposite party agreed and executed Sale Agreement of Flat Nos.A3 & A4 which was sold to the third parties without the knowledge of the complainant and executed sale deed as per Ex.A5 & Ex.A6 for lesser area of different Apartment in Flat Nos.B-3 & E-2 of the same building amounts to deficiency in service which caused great mental agony.  

7.     Further the complainant contended that as per agreement vide Ex.A3 & Ex.A4, the agreed undivided share of land is 344 sq. ft. each.  But as per Ex.A5 & Ex.A6, Sale Deed, the undivided share sold to the complainant is only 300 sq. ft each.  Equally, the plinth area agreed as per the agreement in Ex.A3 & Ex.A4 is 1340 sq ft each but the constructed area given to the complainant is 1255 sq. ft. each.  

8.      Further the contention of the complainant is that as per clause 13 of the sale agreement, specific car parking to be allotted to flat owner.   In this case also, admittedly car parking place is granted.  Further the contention of the complainant is that evenafter repeated requests and demands and a lapse of 55 months, the opposite parties has not provided the following amenities  which had been advertised in the Pamphlet at the time of signing the Sale Agreement and committed deficiency in service which reads as follows:

• Jauzzi with steam bath.
• Multi Station Gym.
• Terrace Community Hall.
• Ample car park at Cellar.
• Health club.
• High Speed Lift
• Cable TV network.
• Telephone – online for each apartment with intercom facility.
• Power backup generator for common areas.
• Water supply BWSSB.  A network of pressure pumps for consistent water pressure.
• Rain water harvesting.
• Painting of external with premium quality ace paints.
• Doors with teakwood panelled main door polished, solid frames with molded panel doors for all doors and fittings.
• Windows – Australian Honne wood framed with shutters including grill work and glass.

   But the complainant has not taken any steps to find out such deficiencies by way of appointing Advocate Commissioner before this Hon’ble Forum to prove his claim.

9.     The contention of the opposite parties is that the agreement between parties entered at Bangalore.  The flat proposed to construct is also at Bangalore.  There is no cause of action at Chennai.   But on a careful perusal Ex.A7, letter dated:01.10.2011 of the opposite parties in which, the address of the opposite parties reads as follows:

“Chandran Housing,

“Jyothi Kunj”

NO 22 (Old  No 62/2), Burkit Road,

T. Nagar,

Chennai – 600 017”

proves that this Forum is having jurisdiction.  The address of the opposite party and transaction held between the complainant and opposite party through Ex.A7 proves that this Forum is having territorial jurisdiction.   Further the contention of the opposite parties is that after due negotiation, the agreement was entered into between the complainant and the opposite parties i.e. Sale Agreement dated:24.09.2007 the opposite party has agreed for construction of flats A3 & A4 and handed over the same to the complainant.   Due to the change of mind of the complainant, the flat was changed.   But there is no record.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that the complainant conveniently suppressed the fact of full satisfaction and filed this case after purchasing two flats.  The claim of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony are imaginary and exorbitant.  The complaint filed by the complainant is unsustainable and there is no truth in it.  The complainant has not proved the deficiency in construction of flat by the opposite parties. Considering facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and the complaint has to be dismissed.

In the result this complaint is dismissed.  No costs.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 10^th day of May 2019. 

 

MEMBER                                                                           PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1		Copy of Pamphlet issued by the opposite parties
Ex.A2	17.11.2006	Copy of Power of Attorney executed by the opposite parties 4 to 6 in favour of the 2nd respondent
Ex.A3	24.09.2007	Copy of Sale Agreement between the complainant and the opposite parties 4 to 6 represented by the opposite parties 1 & 2
Ex.A4	08.12.2009	Copy of Sale Agreement between the complainant and opposite parties 4 to 6 represented by the opposite parties 1 & 2
Ex.A5	25.03.2011	Copy of Sale Deed executed by the opposite parties 4 to 6 represented by the opposite parties 1 & 2 in favour of the complainant
Ex.A6	02.08.2011	Copy of Sale Deed executed by the opposite parties 4 to 6 represented by the opposite parties 1 & 2 in favour of the complainant
Ex.A7	13.04.2012	Office copy of the notice issued by the complainant to the 2nd opposite party
Ex.A8	13.04.2012	Copy of acknowledgment card for the receipt of notice by the 2nd opposite party

OPPOSITE  PARTIES 1 & 3 SIDE DOCUMENTS:  NIL

 

 

MEMBER                                                                           PRESIDENT