AT HYDERABAD.

CC 12 of 2011

Between:

Smt.  P. V. Nagaratnam

W/o. P. Srinivas Rao

Age: 37 years, House Wife

R/o. Flat No. 506

Shanthi Apartments,

Bhagyanagar Colony

Opp. KPHB, Kukatpally

Ranga Reddy Dist.                                      ***                         Complainant. 

And

M/s.   Constructions

Rep. by V. Venkateshwarlu

S/o.   V. Polaiah, Age:  44 years

Plot No. 195/C, Western Hills

Opp. JNTUC, Kukatpally

Hyderabad-500 072.                                   ***                         Opposite Party 

Counsel for                                          M/s.  K. Ram Murthy

Counsel for the Resp:                                 M/s. T. Aruna Chalam                                                  

CORAM:

                    HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D. APPA RAO, PRESIDENT 

                                    SMT. M. SHREESHA, MEMBER

&

                                    SRI S. BHUJANGA RAO, MEMBER

TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND TWELVE

Oral Order: (Per Hon’ble Justice D. Appa Rao, President)

                                                          ***

1)        This is a complaint   under Consumer Protection Act u/s 17(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act  seeking the following prayers:

             i.        To pay  the loss of Rs. 24,30,000/-  on account of non-construction of 2,700 sft  and 45% share of the complainant  i.e., 1215 sft @ Rs. 2,000/- per sft.

           ii.        To pay the outstanding construction work in five   of complainants share @ Rs. 3 lakhs per flat and total of Rs. 15 lakhs.

          iii.        To pay the rental value of Rs. 7  @ Rs. 30,000/- per month from 1.1.2009 till the date of payment.

          iv.        To pay the erection of transformer and providing of individual meters and internal electrical wiring with switches etc. at Rs. 2            v.        To pay for providing of municipal water supply at Rs.   lakhs.

          vi.        To pay for parking area flooring Rs. 3 lakhs.

         vii.        To pay for lift   Rs. 3 lakhs.

       viii.        To pay for building common area   Rs. 4 lakhs.

          ix.        To pay the penal   as deemed fit from 1.1.2009 till the date of completion.

            x.        To pay   of present complaint. 

2)                The case of the complainant in brief is that she hired the services of the opposite party construction company for construction of apartments under development agreement-cum-GPA   It had developed 15,300 sft as against 18,000 sft as agreed.   Even after three years of the agreement it did not finish the construction and development work for which she gave a notice.  It gave reply stating that two flat Nos. 203 and  have been handed over  by completing 80%  of the work after obtaining loan on said flats.  The complainant had to pay Rs.    There  less extent  than mentioned  in the agreement  besides objections from neighbours for which the complainant gave a detailed reply.  In fact it has started selling the flats fell to its share leaving the complainant’s share of 45%.  Non-completion of even a single flat  huge financial loss as well as rentals.    She estimated the left out works and un-constructed built up area by computing at Rs. 55 lakhs.    Therefore she prayed that the above amount be paid besides erection of transformer, internal electrical wiring, providing municipal water, parking area and other works mentioned in the reliefs. 

3)               The opposite party did not choose to file written version despite granting several adjournments. 

4)                The complainant in proof of her case filed  affidavit evidence and got Exs. A1 to  marked.

5)                The opposite party did not avail the opportunity of filing affidavit   controverting the evidence of the complainant. 

6)                The points that arise for consideration

                     I.        Whether the complainant is entitled to flooring and   of five flats a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs @ Rs.  3 lakhs? 

                   II.        Whether she is entitled to a sum of Rs. 24  2700 sft.?

                  III.        Whether  the complainant is entitled to  Rs. 2,25,000/- towards erection of transformer?

                 IV.        Whether the complainant is entitled   Rs. 4 lakhs towards municipal water?

                   V.        Whether the complainant is entitled   an amount of Rs. 3 lakhs towards parking area?

                 VI.        Whether the complainant is entitled to Rs. 3 lakhs towards lift facility and Rs. 4 lakhs towards common area colouring?

                VII.        Whether the complainant is entitled to Rs. 7

7)                It is an undisputed fact that the complainant is an owner   the property consisting of 770.77 sq.yds in S.No.  133 and 134 situated at Madinaguda of Serilingampally mandal in Ranga Reddy district evidenced under Encumbrance Certificate Ex. A6.    The opposite party   entered into a development  agreement-cum-GPA  Ex. A1 & A2  dt.      It was agreed that the complainant was entitled to 45  while the opposite party was entitled to 55% of share in the proposed construction.     Ex. A8 supplementary deed dt.   there is a categorical mention  as to the shares fell to each of the parties viz.    102, 103, 203, 302 and  fell to the share of  the complainant  while the remaining flat Nos. 101, 201, 202, 301, 303, 402 and 403 fell to the share of the builder vide Ex. A8.  It seems that the opposite party   had sold some of the flats  fell to his  share vide Ex. A6 Encumbrance Certificate.  

8)                When the opposite party did not complete the construction as per the   nor handed over the flats, she got issued  Ex. A3 registered  lawyer notice  on 4.9.2010  for which  the opposite party gave reply under Ex. A4.   While  the execution of  the agreement, however it  alleged that it was facing problems from north side boundary as the government was claiming that it was its land.    Anjaneyulu filed a case against the original pattadar by name Purnachander and was creating problems.    It has already handed   two flats to the complainant wherein  80% of work was completed.    had agreed to pay Rs. 30 lakhs  but failed to pay the same.   Though the agreement provides actual extent of 770   on calculation it  came to a lesser extent.    However, he stated that he  ready to develop the above property as per the norms if the complainant fulfilled  the above said lacunas  He would  hand over the share of the complainant,  as per ratio,  agreed.    

9)                For the reasons not known the opposite party did not substantiate any of the objections raised by it in its notice.  The complainant by filing her affidavit evidence   supporting documents proved that flooring and finishing of five flats were not completed.   Built up area of 1215 sft  was not handed over besides erection of transformer, municipal water supply, parking area, lift facility, common area colouring etc.   To substantiate the same she   the valuation report of  Hari Krishna Architects & Constructions marked as Ex. A9.    He inspected and found that the work was still going though it was commenced in 2008.    He   the total value of the balance work at Rs. 27,86,000/-.    He had given details of each work running into 20 pages.  Since the opposite party did not controvert any of the facts, and in the light of technical valuation made by an architect, we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to the following amounts.

                     i.        Flooring and finishing of five flats                        Rs.     15,00,000/-

(Rs. 3 lakhs x 5 flats)

                   ii.        To be built up area of 1215   @                         Rs.     24,30,000/-

2,000/- per sft.

                  iii.        Erection of transformer etc.                                  Rs.      2,25,000/-

                  iv.        Municipal water                                                   Rs.      4,00,000/-

                    v.        Parking area flooring                                            Rs.      3,00,000/-

                  vi.        Lift facility                                                            Rs.     3,00,000/-

                 vii.        Building common area colouring                         Rs.      4,00,000/-

----------------------

Total                                                                              Rs.     55                                                                                      ----------------------

The complainant also   Rs. 7,20,000/- towards rentals.   There is no   in the agreement for payment of rentals  in case of delay.  The complainant could not establish the rents prevailing in the locality.   She could not establish as to the time stipulated for completion of the   in order to award some rents to her.    In the circumstances, we are unable to   any amount towards rents.  In view of delay and non-completion, we are of the opinion a sum of Rs. 5   could be awarded towards compensation for mental agony and harassment.

10)               In the result the complaint is allowed in part  directing the opposite party to pay in all Rs. 55,55,000/- together with compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs and costs of Rs. 20,000/-.  Rest of   complaint  is dismissed.     

1)      _______________________________

PRESIDENT                 

2)      ________________________________

 MEMBER           

3)      ________________________________

 MEMBER           

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

COMPLAINANT                                                              OPPOSITE PARTY

None                                                                                        None

Documents marked for complainant:

Ex  A-1           Certified copy of Document No. 12086/2007 of Irrevocable                                                                        Development Agreement Cum GPA

Ex A-2                        Copy of Document No. 12140 /2007 of Irrevocable Development                                                   Agreement cum GPA

Ex A-3                        Copy of Legal notice to the Respondent 4..09..2010

Ex A-4                        Original Copy of Reply to Legal notice 29.9.2010

Ex A-5                        Certified copy of Reply to Reply notice 7.12..2010

Ex A-6            & 7      original copy of Encumbrance certificates 20.11.2010

Ex A-8                        Supplementary Deed dated 24.12.2008

Ex A-9                        Original copy of balance work valuation by an Architect 13.6.2011

1)      _______________________________

PRESIDENT                 

2)      ________________________________

 MEMBER           

3)      ________________________________

 MEMBER           

      20/03/2012

*pnr