Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/25/2017

Prasanna Baskaran - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Manju Groups - Opp.Party(s)

K.Ramesh, P.Rajavel,M.Kandasamy

17 Sep 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed : 08.06.2016

Date of Reservation      : 18.08.2022

Date of Order               : 17.09.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                           : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                       THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,   : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.25 /2017

SATURDAY, THE 17^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022

Prasannaa Baskaran,

S/o. Baskaran,

No.2, Block C2, Serene Acres,

200 Ft MMRD Road,

Vinayaga Nagar,

Thoraipakkam,

Chennai - 97.                                                              ... Complainant                 

 

..Vs..

1. Manju Groups,

    Rep. by its Manager,

    Chettinadu Chambers,

    No. 39, Radhakrishnan Salai,

    Mylapore, Chennai - 4.

 

2. Manju Groups,

    Rep. by its Manager,

    No.141, 7th Floor,

    Pioneer Agnitio Park,

    OMR, Kandanchavady,

    Next to HCL OMR Service Road,

    Perungudi, Chennai - 96.                                          ...  Opposite Parties

 

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. K.Ramesh

Counsel for the Opposite Parties     : Exparte

 

        On perusal of records and having treated the written arguments of the Complainant as oral arguments, on endorsement made by the Complainant we delivered the following:-

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation and to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards mental agony and to pay a sum of Rs.5,40,000/- towards expenses incurred by the Complainant for rent and to pay a sum of Rs.7,74,000/- towards interest or the loan amount.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant on seeing an advertisement in “The Hindu” Newspaper dated 23.04.2011 stating that the Opposite Parties are constructing an apartment at West Tambaram under the name and style of “Royal Spender” had paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- as booking fees. On 29.08.2011 the Complainant had paid a sum for Rs.12,13,419/- to register the Undivided share. The Opposite Parties entered an construction agreement on 12.05.2011 and in the said agreement the Opposite Parties have agreed for delivery of flat within 12 months from the date of the agreement that is on or before 12.05.2012. But the Opposite Parties failed to do so. The Opposite Parties started to construct the building very late and they did not hand over the possession of the flat in time. The Complainant visited the Opposite Parties office on 04.05.2013 requesting some changes in the plan and electrical points, who asked the Complainant to mail on the same and also informed the Complainant that the changes will be done in 15 days after getting approval from GM.  But the Complainant was shocked to see that no changes was taken place. The Opposite Party handed over the flat on 20.03.2015 with undue delay, incomplete work, worst switch Board and water leakage. The Complainant therefore through his lawyer issued legal notice on 17.02.2016 and the same was duly received by them, but there was no reply from them. Due to the Opposite Parties act the Complainant suffered untold mental agony and the Opposite Parties are liable for the deficiency in service. Hence the complaint.

3.      The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-11  were marked.

4.     The Opposite Parties did not appear before this Commission even after sufficient notice was served on them and remained set exparte.

5.     Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled?

Point No.1:

The Complainant had entered into a Construction Agreement dated 12.05.2011, wherein the Opposite Parties had agreed to construct a Flat at the lay out named as “Royal Splendor” in the Housing Plot C-2, Survey No.381/1D1A1A1B,Tambaram, Kancheepuram District bearing  Flat No.C 1 with a super built-up area of 1015 sq.ft on the second floor which is inclusive of car parking along with technical specifications mentioned therein at a cost of Rs.24,54,569/-payable by the Complainant in stage wise and an Agreement of Sale on 12.05.2011 in respect of the Undivided share of land measuring 553.5 sq.ft out of 3069 Sq.ft in the aforesaid Housing Plot. As per the terms of the Construction Agreement dated 12.05.2011, the Opposite Parties agreed to complete the construction work within a period of one year from the date of signing of the contract. According  to the Agreement the Flat should have been handed over to the Complainant on or before 12.05.2012 by the Opposite Parties. The contention of the Complainant is that on 23.04.2011 he had paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards booking of the Flat. On 29.08.2011, the Complainant had paid a sum of Rs.12,13,419/-. The Complainant had paid the amounts demanded by the Opposite Parties, his loan has been approved in time, but the Opposite Parties started constructing the building very late and did not hand over possession of the Flat in time. As per Ex.A-5, the Complainant had sent a letter dated 06.08.2013 to the Opposite Party regarding the delay in handing over possession of the Flat. The Opposite Parties vide their dated 13.06.2014 had assured the Complainant of handing over the Flat on 30.08.2014. However, it could be seen from Ex.A-8, the possession of Flat was handed over by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant on 20.03.2015, after a delay of nearly 3 years. After handing over of the Flat the Complainant had noticed that sub standard material was used in fittings and doors, car parking was not allotted and earmarked and hence sought for compensation vide letter dated 09.01.2016, Ex.A-9, and legal notice dated 15.02.2016, Ex.A-10, with no responses even after receipt of the notice.

As per of Clause 6 of the Construction Agreement, the Opposite Parties had agreed to complete the construction within one year from the date of the Agreement i.e., on or before 12.05.2012 which may get extended to a reasonable period if there is a disturbance such as riot, natural calamity, incessant rain, scarcity of building material or any other statutory restrictions. The Complainant had sent a letter dated 06.08.2013 to the Opposite Party questioning the delay in handing over possession of the Flat. The Opposite Parties had not given any valid reason for the delay in handing over the flat. Though the Opposite Parties vide their dated 13.06.2014 had assured the Complainant of handing over the Flat on 30.08.2014, the possession of Flat was handed over by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant on 20.03.2015, after unreasonable delay. The Complainant had also paid a considerable amount of money towards rent as found in Ex.A-7. The defects pointed out by the Complainant are not substantiated by proper evidence. The Opposite Parties having received cost of the Flat from the Complainant had caused inordinate delay in construction of Flat and handing over possession of the Flat to the Complainant. Hence this Commission is of the considered view that the Opposite Parties had committed deficiency in service.  Accordingly Point No.1 is answered in favour of the Complainant.

Point Nos.2 and 3:-

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of the forgoing discussions, this Commission is of the considered view that the Opposite Parties are liable to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for the deficiency in service along with cost of Rs.3000/- to the Complainant. Accordingly Point Nos.2 and 3 are answered.

In the result the Complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to  pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) as compensation for the deficiency in service along with cost of Rs.3000/-(Rupees Three Thousand Only) to the Complainant, within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of receipt of this order till the date of payment.

In the result the Complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 17^th of September 2022.  

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1		Copy of Advertisement given by Opposite Party
Ex.A2	12.05.2011	Copy of Construction Agreement
Ex.A3	12.05.2011	Copy of Agreement for Sale
Ex.A4	-	Copy of Payment Details
Ex.A5	06.08.2013	Copy of Letter sent by Complainant to Opposite Party on delay in handling over possession
Ex.A6	13.06.2014	Copy of Intimation Letter from Opposite Party on handling over possession on 30.08.2014
Ex.A7	30.10.2014	Copy of Rental Agreement
Ex.A8	20.03.2015	Copy of Letter of taking possession given by Complainant to Opposite party
Ex.A9	09.01.2016	Copy of Letter sent by Complainant to Opposite Party
Ex.A10	17.02.2016	Copy of Legal Notice issued by Complainant
Ex.A11	-	Copy of Report given by Engineer on incomplete work.

 

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties :-

 

NIL

 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT