Date of Filing:14.01.2008<br /> Date of Order: 06.05.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated: 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 145 OF 2008 <br /> <br /> <br /> Chandrashekar.N,<br /> No.293, Sri Mallesha Nilaya,<br /> II ‘H’ Cross, 5th Main Road,<br /> III Block, WCR III Stage,<br /> Basaveshwar Nagar, <br /> Bangalore-560079. Complainant<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 146 OF 2008 <br /> <br /> <br /> N. Rajashekar,<br /> No.293, Sri Mallesha Nilaya,<br /> II ‘H’ Cross, 5th Main Road,<br /> III Block, WCR III Stage,<br /> Basaveshwar Nagar, <br /> Bangalore-560079. Complainant<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 147 OF 2008 <br /> <br /> <br /> Smt. N. Pushpalatha,<br /> D/o M. Nanjappa,<br /> No.293, Sri Mallesha Nilaya,<br /> II ‘H’ Cross, 5th Main Road,<br /> III Block, WCR III Stage,<br /> Basaveshwar Nagar, <br /> Bangalore-560079. Complainant<br /> COMPLAINT NO: 148 OF 2008 <br /> <br /> Smt. N. Bhagyalakshmi,<br /> D/o M. Nanjappa,<br /> No.293, Sri Mallesha Nilaya,<br /> II ‘H’ Cross, 5th Main Road,<br /> III Block, WCR III Stage,<br /> Basaveshwar Nagar, <br /> Bangalore-560079. Complainant<br /> <br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> M/s Megacity (Bangalore) Developers &<br /> Builders Ltd., Megatower,<br /> No.120, Kengal Hanumanthaiah Road,<br /> Bangalore-560 027,<br /> Represented by its Managing Director. Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President, Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> <br /> These four complaints are clubbed together for passing common orders since the facts and law points involved in all these complaints are one and the same and the opposite party in all the four cases is one and the same. These complaints can conveniently be disposed of by common order. The main order will be kept in complaint No.145/2008 and copy will be kept in other three connected complaints. <br /> The respective complainants have filed U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking direction to the opposite party to execute the sale deed in respect of the sites allotted to them at Vajragiri Township and also to pay compensation.<br /> The facts of the case are that, the opposite party is a developer and has agreed to develop lands and offered general public for allotment of sites in the layout to be formed in the aforesaid lands. The complainants became members of the opposite party and are allotted with membership Nos. and agreed to allot and register sites at Vajragiri Township. The complainants in complaint Nos.145/2008 & 146/2008 have paid Rs.1,51,200/- each towards purchase of the site measuring 40 X 60 feet. The complainants in complaint Nos.147/2008 & 148/2008 have paid Rs.78,000/- each towards purchase of the site measuring 30 X 40 feet. The opposite party has issued allotment letter and possession certificate to the complainants. The complainants have paid all the installments every month. As per the agreement the opposite party has agreed to execute sale deed in respect of the schedule property. The complainants in all the complaints have paid the entire sale consideration amount which is clearly acknowledged by the opposite party by its letter. Copy of the same is produced. On number of occasions the complainants visited and requested the opposite party to execute and register the sale deed in respect of the schedule property. The complainants have been demanding the opposite party to execute the sale deed. The opposite party has failed to execute and register sale deed in respect of the schedule property even after receipt of entire sale consideration amount from the complainants and it amounts deficiency in service and hence the opposite party is liable to execute and register sale deed in favour of the complainants. It is necessary to direct the opposite party to execute the sale deed or to direct the opposite party to refund the amount and damages.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. Notice served by RPAD. Opposite party put in appearance through advocate and filed defence version stating that, the opposite party applied for conversion of the agricultural land into non-agricultural purposes to form the layout as stated above to the concerned Revenue Department. The opposite party company proposed to form the layout, comes within the purview of Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor area planning Authority and therefore the Revenue Department sought clarification/no objection from BMICAPA by its letter dated 18/7/2001. BMICAPA has issued a letter dated 13th August 2001, to the Revenue Department to the effect that the land in question cannot be converted for non-agricultural purposes. Under the above circumstances, the opposite party company is not in a position to form the layout, as proposed earlier. In fact the opposite party company had made all its efforts to apply for conversion of the above said land. The land bearing sy.No.11 measuring 1-Acre 3-Guntas is a granted land with a condition not to alienate and prohibition of transfer of the same for a period of 15 years from 12/8/1996. Hence, the company is not in a position to form the layout of the said land which is nothing but a government land. However the opposite party company has made an arrangement to refund the advance amount paid by the complainant with bank rate of interest. In view of the above, the opposite party company is not in a position to form the layout and execute the sale deed as prayed by the complainants. <br /> 3. Affidavit evidence of both the parties filed. Arguments are heard. <br /> 4. In the light of the argument advanced, the following points arise for my consideration. <br /> 1. Whether the opposite party can be directed to <br /> execute the sale deed in respect of the schedule <br /> property?<br /> <br /> 2. Whether there was any deficiency in service on <br /> the part of the opposite party?<br /> <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 5. The Hon’ble Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has passed an order dated 6th December-2007 in Appeal No.1779/2007 C/W Appeal Nos. 1980 to 2057 of 2007 and other connected cases in Smt. Sudha V/S Megacity Developers. The above batch of appeals came to be disposed off by the Hon’ble State Commission with a direction to the opposite party to refund the amount paid by the respective complaints with interest at 9% p.a and also to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation to each of the complainants and the opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2,000/- to each of the complainant towards costs of the litigation. So, in view of the above judgment rendered by the Hon’ble State Commission the same principle is also applicable to the facts of the present case. The opposite party in this case is also Megacity Developers and Builders. Since there are so many legal hurdles in forming the layout, therefore the opposite party is not in a position to form the layout and allot the sites. Therefore, the only remedy and relief that could be granted to the complainant is refund of amount with interest and compensation. Since the matter is already decided and covered by the judgment of State Commission, it is not necessary for me to discuss the issue in detail. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, I feel it would be just fair and reasonable to direct the opposite party to refund the amount with interest and compensation. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:-<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. All the complaints are allowed. The complainants in complaint Nos.145/2008 & 146/2008 are entitled to get refund of Rs.1,51,200/- each with interest at 10% p.a from the date of respective payments till the payment/realization. The complainants in complaint Nos.147/2008 & 148/2008 are entitled to get refund of Rs.78,000/- each with interest at 10% p.a from the date of respective payments till the payment/realization. The opposite party is directed to pay the respective amounts to the complainants with interest as ordered within 30 days from the date of this order. The opposite party is directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to each of the complainants. Failing which, the compensation amount also carries interest at 10% p.a. from the date of this order. All the complainants are entitled to Rs.5,000/- each towards costs of the present proceedings from the opposite party.<br /> <br /> 7. The original of this order shall be kept in complaint No.145/2008 and a true copy thereof shall be kept in each of the other cases. <br /> 8. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> 9. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2008.<br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />