Date of Filing: 24.11.2017
Date of Order: 25.09.2019
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD
P r e s e n t
HON’BLE Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B. PRESIDENT.
HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER
ON THIS THE WEDNESDAY THE 25th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019
C.C.No.501/ 2017
Between
Smt. K M Bharati,
W/o. Sri K.Chandra Sekhar, Aged about 44 years,
Occ: Govt. Service, R/o. H.No.2-1-431/1, Flat No.202,
Mathruchaya Apts., Street No.4,
Nallakunta, Hyderabad 500 044. ……Complainant
And
- M/s. Chennamaneni Infra (Pvt.)Ltd.,
Having its Corporate Office at Mudra Tara Tycoon,
Flat No.203 & 204, Beside Big Bazar, Tarnaka,
Secunderabad -17,
Rep.by its Managing Director,
Sri Cennamaneni Srinivas Rao,
S/o. Sri Kishan Rao, aged about 40 years.
- Sri Chennamaneni Srinivas Rao,
S/o. Sri Kishan Rao, aged about 40 years.
Oc: Business, R/o. Mudra Tara Tycoon,
Flat No.203 & 204, Beside Big Bazar, Tarnaka,
Secunderabad -17. ….Opposite Parties
Counsel for the complainant : Mr.Ashok Talla
Counsel for the Opposite Parties : Mr K.Ranga Reddy.
O R D E R
(By Sri. Sri P. Vijender, B.Sc., LL.B., President on behalf of the bench)
1) This complaint has been preferred under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging that the opposite party by not replacing the product sold to the complainant has caused deficiency of service. Hence for a direction to the opposite party to refund the amount received from the complainant with interest and award rent as agreed in the said agreement till November, 2017 and award compensation and legal expenses incurred by the complainant and interest on the amounts claimed.
2) The complaint averments in brief are that :
Opposite party is a private limited company in the business of real estate and opposite party No.2 is its Managing Director. The opposite parties have venture to develop in the land of 21 acres and 6 guntas covered by survey numbers 168,169,170,171,172, 198 and 199 situated at Venkatapur Grampanchayat Korremula village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddyd District. In the process of business opposite parties proposed to offer flats to general public with the amenities in the residential complex known as ‘Avalon Courts’. Complainants having attracted by the offer of opposite parties agreed to purchase a flat with super built up area of 1500 Sq.feet and paid an amount of Rs.12,18,750/- by way of 5 cheques during the period from 12.4.2013 to 18.5.2013. Opposite parties have executed an agreement of sale in the form of MOU on 8.5.2013 and as per the terms of it the balance sale consideration shall be paid at the time of registration of the flat which will be 18 months time from the date of agreement of sale with gra period of 6 months. If for any reason the opposite party fails to complete the construction and deliver the possession agreed to pay rent of Rs.10,000/- per month till handing over the flat to the complainant after expiry of 24 months from the date of agreement.
By 8.9.2015 the agreement period of 24 months and grace period of 6 months have been expired . But the opposite parties did not commence the construction work and in fact did not secure permissions from concerned authorities such as HUDA etc. Hence the agreement clause for payment of rent at Rs.10,000/- per month attracts from 8.9.2015 to the date of filing of the complaint. On account of not handing over the flat as agreed under the agreement despite receipt of sale consideration complainants suffered mentally and physically. Complainants lost confidence in the opposite party to complete the project as agreed. The amount collected from the complainant and other prospective purchasers were utilized by the opposite party for commercial purpose.
The complainant got issued a legal notice to the opposite parties on 14.9.2017 asking to refund the advance amount with interest at 24% p.a. from the date of collecting the amount and pay rent of Rs.10,000/- till handing over of the possession. Despite service of notice opposite parties neither paid the amount nor came forward to complete the construction work. Hence the present complaint44.
3) Opposite parties has not filed written version as well as evidence affidavit and it filed only written arguments .
4) In the enquiry the complainant got filed his evidence affidavit reiterating the material facts of the complaint and to support the same he got filed original MOU cum agreement of sale, brochure published by the opposite party, Office copy of legal notice , postal receipts and acknowledgements there to as exhibits A1 to A6. Both sides have filed written arguments.
5) On a consideration of the material brought on the regard the following points have emerged for consideration :-
1. Whether the complainant could be able to substantiate allegations of deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the amounts claimed?
3. To what relief?
6) Point No.1: By filing Exhibit A1 MOU cum Agreement of sale complainant has established that the opposite party agreed to complete the construction of flats with super buildup area of 1500 sq.feet with car parking and other facilities and deliver its possession within the stipulated period , if they fails they agreed to pay rent at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month. As already said the opposite party did not file written version and evidence affidavit but filed written arguments admitting all the facts narrated by the complainant in the complaint as well as in the evidence affidavit . The only plea taken in the written arguments is on account of unavoidable circumstances and technical problems they could not secure permissions from the competent authority to commence the work. But now the permission has been received and agreed to complete the construction and deliver the vacant possession of the flat to the complainant if sufficient time is granted for it. It is evident from the written arguments filed for the opposite parties that they will commence construction only as permission have been received. The complainant has categorically stated that he has lost confidence in the opposite parties about construction of the flats hence seeking for refund of the amount with interest. In the light of it further time cannot be granted to opposite parties for construction of the apartments as agreed in the MOU cum agreement of sale. Opposite parties themselves admitted that it caused deficiency of service hence no further enquiry to it is needed. Accordingly the point is answered in favour of the complainant.
7) Point No.2:- Since Exhibit A1 MOU cum agreement of sale mandates the opposite party to pay rent of Rs.10,000/- per month the opposite party is liable to pay the same to the complainant from 8.9.2015 to the date of payment. The opposite party is liable to refund of Rs.12.18,750/- with interest at 24% p.a. from 8.5.2013 to the date of payment. The opposite party by failing to construction of the flat and deliver its vacant possession to the complainant caused metal agony to the complainant . Hence liable to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to complainant. Opposite party also liable to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards legal expenses incurred. Accordingly the point is answered in favour of the complainant.
8) PointNo.3:- In the result the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties :
1. To refund an amount of Rs.12,18,750/- with interest at 24% p.a. from
8.5.2013 to the date of payment.
2. To pay rent of Rs.10,000/- per month from 8-9-2015 to the date of
payment.
3. To pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for causing mental agony to the
Complainant.
4.. To pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards costs of this complaint.
Time granted for compliance is thirty days from service of this order.
Dictated to steno transcribed and typed by her and pronounced by us on this the 25th day of September, 2019.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESS EXAMINED
NIL
Exhibits filed on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A1 - Original MOU Cum Agreement of sale 8.5.2013
Ex.A2 – Brochure published by the opposite party
Ex.A3 – Copy of Legal notice dt.14.9.2017
Ex.A4 – Postal receipts
Ex.A5 – Acknowledgements
Ex.A6 – News Paper clipping
Exhibits filed on behalf of the Opposite parties:
Nil
MEMBER PRESIDENT
