Karnataka

Bangalore 1st & Rural Additional

CC/339/2021

Sri. K.M. Prabhakara Reddy - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Krishna Builders - Opp.Party(s)

10 Aug 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE BENGALURU RURAL AND URBAN I ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, I FLOOR, BMTC, B BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU-27
 
Complaint Case No. CC/339/2021
( Date of Filing : 31 Jul 2021 )
 
1. Sri. K.M. Prabhakara Reddy
S/o. late Maddi Reddy, Aged about 51 years, R/o No.104, 12th Main, J.C. Nagar, Kurubarahalli, Behind K.E.B., Bengaluru-560086. Mob:9880161651
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/s. Krishna Builders
Formerly Known as M/s. Ashrya Developers) (Land Developers) No.138, Gajendra Complex, 50 feet Road, Hanumanthanagar, Bengaluru-560050. Represented by its Proprietor Sri. V. Krishna Murthy.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. H.R.SRINIVAS, B.Sc. LL.B., PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Sharavathi S.M.,B.A. L.L.B MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 10 Aug 2021
Final Order / Judgement

CC.No.339/2021

Dated:10.08.2021

ORDERS ON MAINTAINABILITY

Complainant filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 seeking direction to OP to convey site measuring 30X40 and also award compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- for the delay in allotting the sites and other reliefs as the commission deems fit.

The brief facts are that; the complainant became a member of OP M/s. Krishna Builders by making application which was earlier being called Ashraya Developers (Registered). Inspite of agreeing to form the, layout and sites, and allot the same, measuring 30X40, OP did not  allot the same whereas the layout to be formed was acquired by BDA. He  issued a notice on 02.07.2016 calling upon the OP to allot the site and put him in possession and he also filed writ petition against BDA. Hence the complaint. On perusing the complaint and the documents filed, he has became a member during 1994.  No documents to show that he had paid the amount has been produced. Further he issued a legal notice on 02.07.2016 and from that day onwards, he did not take any action against OP. In view of this, the complaint filed is highly belated and no application to condone the delay is filed. No receipt produced to show that he has paid the sital value in order to hold him as a consumer as defined under the provision of Consumer Protection Act 2019. Hence this COMPLAINT IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY DISMISSED.

 

                MEMBER                 PRESIDET

RAK*

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. H.R.SRINIVAS, B.Sc. LL.B.,]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Sharavathi S.M.,B.A. L.L.B]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.