BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 30^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023

COMPLAINT No.523/2021

ORDER

SMT.M.SHOBHA, PRESIDENT

1. The complaint has been filed under Section 35 of C.P.Act (hereinafter referred as an Act) against the OP for the following reliefs against the OP:-

1. To Direct the Ops to do and comply all that are required and to obtain apartment building construction completion certificate (CC) and occupancy certificate (OC) from the BBMP authorities as mandatorily required in law.
2. To Direct the Ops to do and comply all that are required and to obtain No-objection certificate from the Pollution control board and clearance for the sewage treatment plant issued by the concerned government authority.
3. To Direct the Ops to do and comply all that are required and to provide licenses, approvals, plumbing/ electrical plans, NOCs for operation of assets, related documentation, etc., to Sai Poorna Premier Apartment owners association.
4. To Direct the Ops to do and comply all that are required and to clearly demarcate 3-acres of landed property and its boundaries (i.e., schedule A property) make clear segregation between commercial and residential complex and provide an official plan and survey sketch of asset distribution between them.
5. To Direct the Ops to do and comply all that are required and to install all fire safety infrastructures and get necessary no-objection certificate from the fire department.
6. To Direct the Ops to provide as per original building plan separate entry from and exit towards on either side of the public road frontage in such a way that the drive way goes around the building allowing one way movement of vehicles.
7. To Direct the Ops to do and comply all that are required and to install rain water harvesting system and solar power water heating system in Sai poorna premier apartment complex.
8. To direct the Ops to pay a compensation and damages and also the share of expenditure the complainant is required to bear for completing various uncomplied and under finished work to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- including towards mental agony,  expenses incurred by the flat owners, devaluation of the property/flat owned by the complainant.
9. To direct the Ops to pay/reimburse balance betterment charges of Rs.34,41,078/- to the owners’ association viz. Sai Poorna Premier Apartment owners’ association as stated in para 25 above or pay the same to the individual complainant’s in such proportion, pari passu.
10. To direct the Ops to reimburse the cost of installation of Rain water harvesting system incurred by the owners association i.e., cost of Rs.4,00,000/- as stated in para 26 above.
11. Order and direct the Ops to pay the cost of the proceedings.
12. Order and direct the Ops to pay the interest at the rate of 18% per annum on all the items of amounts claimed from the date it was due to till realization.
13. To order and direct the Ops to segregate the land parcel pertaining to the commercial complex and the residential apartments, and also to segregate and separate all amenities including water connection and electricity between the commercial complex and the residential apartments.
14. Pass any other order/s.

2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The complainant has purchased B schedule property under registered sale deed executed by the OP.  The complainant has filed this complaint for various deficiencies of services committed by the OP1 to 4. The OP1 to 4 have devised a scheme for development of  A schedule property for construction of multistoried apartment/complex in the name of Sai Poorna Premier in terms of the registered Joint Development Agreement dated 24.05.2010 executed between the owners of the A schedule land and the OP1 to 4.

3. Even though the joint development agreement also did not show any commercial construction the OP as a builder and promoter ventured to construct a commercial complex in front of the residential apartment facing the road which is a separate project altogether. While commencing the construction of the apartment project Sai Poorna Premier there was no disclosure to the purchasers of the flat including the complainant that the Ops are also planning to build any type of commercial complex right in front of the residential blocks. The sanctioned plan shown to the complainant and other owners did not show the prospectus of any commercial complex coming up in front of residential apartment as part and parcel of the project.

4. It is further case of the complainant that the owners of the apartments/flats in Sai Poorna premier apartment condominium have formed an association of owners of apartments and they have registered the association of apartment owners under the Karnataka apartment of Ownership act 1972 and the association is named as Sai Poorna Premium apartments (Regd).

5. It is further case of the complainant that even after several follow-ups with the Ops there is no clarity on this status of required approvals clearances from statutory authority for this apartment as the Ops have not submitted the necessary documents either in original or in copies to the apartment owners or the association inspite of several request. In the capacity as a builder and promoter the Ops have not fulfilled any of the obligations on their part which will certainly expose the owners/residents of the apartment complex to penal actions and huge amount of fine/penalties that may be imposed by concerned authorities apart from under mining severely the value of the apartments their marketable titles and rental values etc.,

6. It is further case of the complainant that inspite of several request the OP have failed to provide a proper hand over to the apartment owners association including documents related to license approval, plumbing electrical plans, NOCs for operation of assets, documentation etc., which will help them to run the apartment facilities and provide appropriate response to surveyors, auditors and officials from statutory authorities. This has caused lot of mental agony and anxiety to the owners regarding legality of the building and its facilities and amenities and owners have been put to lots of inconvenience, anxiety, agony, uncertainty and monitory loss.

7. It is the specific contention taken by the complainant that the Ops have not provided them the completion certificate, occupancy certificate that would be issued by the BBMP authorities as mandatory required in law.  The owners of the apartments including the complainant are having apprehension that the Ops have not completed the construction of the complex as per the approved building plan and as such the authorities concerned have not issued the completion certificate and occupancy certificate because of non compliance of terms of plan sanction.

8. It is further case of the complainant that the Ops have not obtained the required NOC from Pollution Control Board and clearance for the sewage treatment plan installed in the complex after complying with requisite procedural aspect and with norms as prescribed by the pollution control board in so far as the facilities installed in Sai Poorna Premier apartment complex.  Inspite of repeated requested no documents are forth coming. There is a notice from KSPCB pointing out that CFO for the HTP has not been obtained and that would lead to penalties.  The Ops have not provided any rain water harvesting system nor solar power water heating system in the apartment which is mandatory requirement to get an occupancy certificate.

9. It is further case of the complainant that as per the plans provided to the complainant there is no clear demarcation of three acres of land on which the residential apartment project is built.

10. It is further case of the complainant that the Ops without prior knowledge or awareness of the complainant and other flat owners commence construction of commercial complex in front of the residential apartment which was a matter of considerable distress to the owners and residents of the apartment as it has impaired the elevation, frontage and free flow of natural air and light into the apartment area which the Ops are liable to compensate to the apartment owners. The said commercial complex is in incomplete form and is in a deserted condition and thereby causing lot of inconvenience anxiety and host of nuisance to the complainant and other flat owners. It is frequented by antisocial elements, mischief mangers, stray dogs, snakes and other vermin’s in addition to garbage bumping emitting foul smell all the time.

11. It is further case of the complainant that he and other flat owners have got issued legal notice on 07.09.2019 through their advocate to do all the requirements.  Even though the OP received the legal notice on 07.09.2019 instead of redressing the grievance of the complainant which has been pending for quite some times addressed certain statements promising to complete most of the work.  The OP has issued reply notice on 17.09.2019 alleging that he will do the needful and he will comply with all the requirements.  The OP has clearly admitted and acknowledged the deficiency on their part in the reply notice.  He has postponed the compliance and also pleaded financial difficulties due to recession in the real estate market etc., which are all false and they are lame excuses for evading and delay in performance of their essential and mandatory obligations not only in terms of Joint development agreement but also in terms of basic and obligatory duties as a developer to give the product complete in all respects to the best satisfaction and requirements of the consumers including the complainant and other flat purchasers. 

12. It is further case of the complainant that after sending the legal notice to the OP the owners association was constrained to construct themselves the rain water harvesting system at a cost of Rs.4,00,000/- out of the contribution of flat owners like the complainant which the builder is bound to reimburse with reasonable at 18%p.a.

13. As per the original plan a separate entry/exit and the drive way goes around the building allowing a one way moment of vehicles and in view of the commercial construction the OP blocked the said drive way and now there is only one entry exit causing all vehicle to take a U-turn and come back the same way. This was a major violation as per the fire safety notice from fire department.

14. There is some delay in filing this complaint due to unavoidable reasons hence the complainant prays for allowing this complaint.

15. In response to the notice, OP1 to 3 appeared but failed to file their version and also to adduce their evidence. 

16. The SPA holder of the complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and relied on 19 documents and same is marked as Ex.P1 to P19.

17. Complainant filed written arguments. OPs have neither adduced any evidence nor filed written arguments.   Perused the written argument filed by the complainant and documents.

18. The following points arise for our consideration as are:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OPs?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

19. Our answers to the above points are as under:

       Point No.1:  In the Affirmative

      Point No.2: Partly Affirmative

      Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

20. Point No.1 AND 2: These two points are inter related and hence they have taken for common discussion.

21. Perused the complaint, written arguments and documents filed by the complainant. Even though the OP1 to 3 have appeared before this Commission have failed to file their version and to lead their evidence.  Hence the evidence of complainant and the documents filed by the complainant remained unchallenged and there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence and documents relied by the complainant.

22. It is clear from the evidence and documents of the complainant.  The OP1 to 4 being the developer/builder and the service provider to the complainant have devised a scheme for development of A schedule property for construction of multi storied complex in the name of Sai Poorna Premier.  They have entered into a joint development agreement as per Ex.P2 on 24.05.2010 between the owners of the A schedule land.  The OP1 to 4 have executed the absolute sale deed in favour of the complainant as Ex.P1 relating to the B schedule property in the complaint.  Even though the sale deed Ex.P.1 was executed by the Ops as per Ex.P1 on 02.08.2014 and they have allowed the complainant and other plot owners to occupy the B schedule property in towers 1, 2 and 3 i.e., in Block A and 4(i.e., in Block B) in the year 2015 onwards at in Towers 5 and 6 i.e., in Block B in the year 2016 onwards. 
23. It is further grievance of the complainant that at the time of commencing the construction of the apartment project there was no disclosure to the purchaser of the flats including the complainant that the Ops are planning to build any type of commercial complex right in front of the residential blocks.  The sanction plan shown to the complainant and other owners did not show the prospectus of any commercial complex coming up in front of residential apartment project as part and parcel of the project.  The two blocks i.e., A and B consisting of 228 residential apartments. 

24. As per the JDA clause 1 at page 6 and 7 Ex.P2 it is clear that the first party authorized the second and the OP1 to 4 being the second party agrees and undertakes to obtain the permission sanction, licencing for building construction and after obtaining to develop the schedule property by putting up residential complex thereon on their own costs with compound walls gates internal and external services relating to electricity water and sewage and other works, the Ops being the second parties shall have the plan sanction at their own cost and expenses including any other expenses or incidental thereto. 
25. The complainant along with other owners have constituted themselves into an association of apartment owners and it is registered under the provisions of Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972. It is the main grievance of the complainant that the Ops have not at all fulfilled many of the obligations on their part which is certainly explore the owners/residents of the apartment to penal action and huge amount of fines/penalties that may be imposed by the concerned authorities apartment from undermining severely the asset value of the apartments their marketable titles and rental values. 

26. As per the specific clauses in Ex.P2 it is the duty of the Ops to provide all the facilities to the complainant and other owners.  They have to provide documents related to licences, approvals, plumbing /electrical plan, NOCC for operation of assets, documentation etc., which will help them to run the apartment facilities and provide appropriate response to surveyors, auditors and officials from statutory authorities. 

27. It is the grievance of the complainant that the Ops have not provided them the completion certificate and occupancy certificate that would be issued by the BBMP authorities and it is mandatorily required in law.  The Ops have not completed the construction of the complex as per the approved building plan and as such the concerned authorities have not issued the completion certificate and the occupancy certificate because of non compliance of terms of plan sanctioned. The Ops have not obtained the NOC from pollution control board and clearance for the sewage treatment plant installed in the complex after complying with required procedure aspects and norms prescribed by the pollution control board.  In addition to this there is a notice from KSPCB as per Ex.P9 pointing out that CSO for HTP has not been obtained and that would lead to penalties. 

28. The Ops have not provided any rain water harvesting system no solar power water heating system in the apartment which is a mandatory requirement to get an occupancy certificate. 

29. It is further grievance of the complainant that as per the plans provided to the complainant there is no clear demarcation of three acres of land in which the residential apartment project is built. The complainant is having an apprehension that the Ops may not have provided the agreed land share to the flat owners or they have encroached an extra land exposing the client to legal hassles in future.  As per the sale agreement the land area is three acres.  The Ops without the prior knowledge and awareness of the complainant and other flat owners commenced construction of commercial complex in front of the residential apartment which was a matter of considerable distress to the owners and the residents of the apartment as it impaired, the elevation, frontage and free flow of natural air and light into the apartment area. The said commercial complex is in incomplete form and it is in a deserted condition and causing lot of inconvenience, anxiety and nuisance to the flat owners.  It is frequented by antisocial elements, mischief mongers, stray dogs, snakes and other worming in addition to garbage dumping emitting foul smell almost all the time. 

30. It is further grievance of the complainant that the OP has not clearly segregated the commercial and residential parts of the complainants resulting in challenge on asset distribution/land demarcation and use and control of facilities like HTP, transformer, DG, water sumps etc., between the commercial and residential part of the complex which may result in overdue than specification/capacity which would inevitably result in these facilities breaking down in addition to other safety hazards and inconvenience for the residents.  This will also cause friction between the owners of commercial and residential parts of the complex regarding land distribution, maintenance cost etc., causing mental agony and harassment to the complainant and other residents of the complex.

31. The Ops have not provided fire safety infrastructure which is mandated by law as this apartment is a high raise building having as many as 10 floors comprising six towers.  The fire safety department has issued a notice to BESCOM to disconnect the power to the apartment complex as fire safety guidelines are not followed in the apartment.  The commissioner of fire and safety had issued notice to the builder since 2018-19 stating that the builder should complete the fire safety work within one month and as a response to the said notice Ex.P.12 the builder did start the piping for wet/dry riser systems but stopped in the mid way for the best reasons known to them. When the Ops have not complied with the demands made by the complainant and other flat owners and the Ops have deliberately delayed and ignored the demands made by the complainant and other flat owners finally they got issued legal notice on 07.09.2019 to do and comply or that are required.  The OP after received the legal notice  have issued a reply admitted and acknowledged the deficiency but interalia stated several reasons for differing /postponing the compliance and also pleaded their own financial difficulties due to recession in the real estate market which reasons patently false and lame excuses for evading and delay in performance of their essential and mandatory obligations not only in the terms of JDA Ex.P.2 but also in terms of basic and obligatory duties as a developer to give the product complete in all respects to the best satisfaction and requirements of the complainant. 

32. In support of his contention the complainants has relied on 19 documents i.e., Ex.P1 to P19.  The complainant has relied on the SPA executed by him in favour of SPA holder and copy of registered sale deed and copy of JDA, copy of broacher, copy of reply notice, copy of notice issued by BBMP, copy of two tax invoices and copy of letter of pollution Control Board and copy of show cause notice issued by Pollution Control Board and reply to show cause notice of the Pollution Control Board and another reply to show cause notice to Pollution Control Board and direction issued by the PCB and proceedings of PCB and copy of notice issued by Fire Department and copy of letter of association to BESCOM and letter of BESCOM issued to association and letter of PCB and copy of the letter of fire department.

33. It is clear from the above documents and the allegations made in the complaint and the reply notice issued by the Ops that they have completely neglected to provide all the amenities to the complainant and other flat owners after thy started occupying flats from the year 2016.  The Ops have completed all the other projects namely Sai Poorna Lexuria and Sai Poorna Ramara and Sai Poorna Premium. The Ops have invested all the money collected from the complainant and other purchasers to other projects and they have completed the other projects and they have deliberately left this project without providing any amenities.  The Ops are due betterment charges amounting to Rs.34,41,078/-.  The association of owners have constrained to construct themselves the rain water harvesting system at a cost of Rs.4,00,000/- out of the contribution of the flat owners like the complainant and other owners and the builder is bound to reimburse the same.  Even though the Ops have commenced the work on the commercial project in the year 2018 and it went on till 2019 for completing the bare structure.  They are simply giving assurances to the complainant and other flat members that they will comply with their demand and obtain the necessary approval and license from the concerned authorities.

34. It is clear from all these documents and the admission made by the OP in their reply notice that the OP have not at all complied with the demands made by the complainant and other owners even though they have collected all the consideration amount and executed absolute sale deed in favour of the complainant in the year 2014 itself. 

35. On these background we have gone through the decisions of the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and also the Hon’ble Supreme Court.  The Hon’ble NCDRC in R.P No.292/2020 has clearly held that:

“Consumer Protection Act, 1986-Section 21(b) –Real Estate-Deficiency in service on the part of Developer-Non-provision for basic amenities in flats-Complaint allowed by District Forum- Appeal dismissed by State Commission with additional cost of Rs.5,000/- payable by Petitioners to Respondent-Provision of municipal water supply as well as proper sewage connection are certainly responsibility of Petitioner which cannot be evaded or avoided under any pretext whatsoever-In absence of these provisions, Petitioner could not obtain building completion certificate which is a must before registering any flat-This is a clear case of deficiency in service on part of Petitioners-Regarding provision of access of building to main road and non-provision of street lights, District Forum held that Complainant could also not provide any evidence as to efforts made by them to contract municipal corporation and absolved Petitioner from being responsible for the same-Jurisdiction of National Commission under Section 21(b) is very limited-National Commission is not required to re-appreciate and reassess evidences and reach to its own conclusion-Court can intervene only when petitioner succeeds in showing that Forum below has wrongly exercised its jurisdiction or there is a miscarriage of justice-All parameters regarding supply of water, road and electricity would be automatically solved if occupancy certificate was obtained in respect of completed building and proper conveyance deed was executed in respect of land and building in favour of concerned Cooperative Housing Society-Petitioner is found deficient on all these counts-No reason to interfere with concurrent findings of both Fora below-Revision petition dismissed.”

And it is also clearly held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3302/2005 that when the owner of a plot of land enters with an agreement with a builder for development of property by construction of a building and sharing the constructed area between the owner and the builder and the developer commits any breach either by failing to deliver owner’s share of constructed area or by constructing the building contrary to specifications, or by failing to fulfill the obligations relating to completion certificate or amenities like water, electricity and drainage, whether the owner can maintain a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act and whether in such circumstances, the owner can claim that he is a consumer and the builder is the service provider.

36. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has also held that it is the duty of the developer to rectify those deviations or bring the deviation within the permissible limits and secure and completion certificate and C & D forms from MCD.  The builder cannot say that he is not bound to produce the completion certificate and he is not concerned whether the building is in accordance with the sanctioned plan or not, whether it fulfills the requirements of the Municipal bylaws or not or whether there are violations or deviations.  The builder cannot be permitted to avoid or escape the consequence of its illegal acts. The obligations on the part of the builder to secure a sanctioned plan and construct a building carries with it an implied obligations to comply with the requirements of the Municipal and building laws and secure the mandatory permissions/certificates.

37. In addition to this, this Commission has also relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Meerut Development Authority vs. M.K.Gupta.

38. It is clearly held in this decisions neither the flat in question completed in all respects along with the completion and occupancy certificate has been delivered nor the amount has been refunded so that the complainant has continuous cause of action and the complainant is entitled for the compensation of the entire amount which he has paid towards the sale consideration. 

39. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in another decisions WG. Cdr.Arifur Rehaman Khan vs. DLF Southern Home Pvt. Ltd. held that Consumer Fora had the jurisdiction to award the just reasonable compensation as an incident of power to direct the removable of deficiency of service and award the suitable compensation.

40. It is also clearly held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lucknow Development Authority vs. M.K.Gupta that all the builders/contractors Authorities of any stage engaging in house construction activities in any manner or amenable for  Consumer Protection Act for any act or commission relating to housing activity such as delay in deliver of possession, non completion of the construction within a stipulated time and defective and faulty construction and more which states that the builders who construct the houses are liable to pay the compensation.

41. In another judgement the H.P. Housing Board vs. Varinder Kumar Garg and another the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the conduct of the appellant is such that they deserves no sympathy, being the public body performing the public service they cannot act in blatantly callous and corrupt manner, they have sold the flat which had major defects and which has poor quality of construction. 

42. The burden is on the builder to complete the construction and secure completion certificate and if there are any deviations the builder will have to pay the penalties i.e. to do whatever is necessary to get the same regularized the builder cannot escape from the liability.

43. Under these circumstances, the burden is on the OPs to rectify the deviations or defects in getting the completion certificate, occupancy certificate from BBMP and NOC from PCB and clearance for the sewage treatment plant by the concerned government authorities and Ops are liable to provide licences approvals, plumbing/electrical plans, NOCs for operation of assets related documentation to the owner’s association.  The Ops are further liable to clearly demarket three acres of landed properties and its boundaries i.e., A schedule property to make clear the segregation between the commercial and residential complex and to provide official plan and survey sketch of asset distribution between them.

44. The Ops are further liable to provide fire safety infrastructure and to get necessary NOC from the Fire Department and they are liable to provide separate entry from and exit towards an either side of the public road frontage in such a way that the drive way goes around the building allowing one way moment of vehicle as per the original building plan.

45. The Ops are further liable to install rain water harvesting system and solar power water heating system to the apartment complex. The Ops are liable to pay /reimburse balance betterment charges of Rs.34,41,078/- to the owner’s association of the complainant. 

46. When the Ops have failed to install the rain water harvesting system the same was installed by the complainant’s apartment owner’s association at the cost of Rs.4,00,000/- and Ops are liable to reimburse the amount.

47. The Ops are liable to segregate and separate all amenities including water connection and electricity between commercial complex and residential apartment since it may leads to friction between the owners of commercial and residential parts of the complex regarding the maintenance cost and these facilities inevitably resulting breaking down in addition to other safety hazards and inconvenience for the residents. 

48. The complainants have also claimed a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- and also claimed an interest @ 18% p.a., on all the items of the amount claimed from the date it was due to till realization.  The amount and the interest claimed by the complainant is on the higher side.  Hence, we are of the opinion that a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- is sufficient and the complainant is entitled for the interest @ 8% p.a., on all the items of the amount claimed from the date it was due till realization.  The complainant is also entitled for the litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- . Hence, the complainants have clearly established the deficiency of service and also the unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.  The OPs are also liable to compensate the complainant as they have entered into JDA and GPA with the land owner and they are also participated in the construction of the apartments of the complainant.  Hence, we answer the above Point No.1 in the Affirmative and No.2 Partly in the affirmative.

49. POINT NO.3:     In view of the discussion made in the preceding paragraphs the complaint requires to be allowed in part and hence we proceed to pass the following;

ORDER

1. The complaint is allowed in part with cost.
2. The Ops are directed to obtain apartment building construction completion certificate (CC) and occupancy certificate (OC) from the BBMP authorities, No-objection certificate from the Pollution control board and clearance for the sewage treatment plant issued by the concerned government authority.
3. Ops are directed to provide licenses, approvals, plumbing/ electrical plans, NOCs for operation of assets, related documentation, etc., to Sai Poorna Premier apartment owners association.
4. Ops are directed to clearly demarcate 3-acres of landed property and its boundaries (i.e., schedule A property) make clear segregation between commercial and residential complex and provide an official plan and survey sketch of asset distribution between them.
5. Ops are directed to provide fire safety infrastructures and get necessary no-objection certificate from the fire department.
6. Ops are directed to provide as per original building plan separate entry from and exit towards on either side of the public road frontage in such a way that the drive way goes around the building allowing one way movement of vehicles.
7. Ops are directed to install rain water harvesting system and solar power water heating system in Sai poorna premier apartment complex.
8. Ops are directed to pay/reimburse balance betterment charges of Rs.34,41,078/- to the owners’ association viz. Sai Poorna Premier Apartment owners’ association or pay the same to the individual complainant’s in such proportion pari passu.
9. Ops are directed to reimburse the cost of installation of Rain water harvesting system incurred by the owners association i.e., cost of Rs.4,00,000/-.
10. Ops are directed to pay the interest at the rate of 8% per annum on all the items of amounts claimed from the date it was due to till realization.
11. Ops are directed to segregate the land parcel pertaining to the commercial complex and the residential apartments, and also to segregate and separate all amenities including water connection and electricity between the commercial complex and the residential apartments.
12. The OPs are also directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) towards cost of litigation expenses to the complainant. 
13. The OPs are directed to comply the direction within 60 days from the date of this order failing which complainant is entitled for interest at 12% p.a., on all the items claimed from the date it was due till realisation.
14. Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.
15. Return spare copies of the pleading and evidence to the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 30^th day of MARCH, 2023)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party: - NIL –