Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

CC/09/2521

Mahesh K,Joshi. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sre, Ishwarya Downtown. Rep Its pro. L.F. Patil. - Opp.Party(s)

07 Nov 2009

ORDER


BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSLAL FORUM, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.
Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cauvery Bhavan, 8th Floor, BWSSB Bldg., K. G. Rd., Bangalore-09.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/2521

Mahesh K,Joshi.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Sre, Ishwarya Downtown. Rep Its pro. L.F. Patil.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED: 03.11.2009 DISPOSED ON: 09.06.2010 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) DATED THIS THE 9TH JUNE 2010 PRESENT:- SRI. B.S.REDDY PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT NO.2521/2009 Sri. Mahesh K. Joshi, S/o Krishna Rao Joshi, No.91, 6th Main Road, 38th Cross, Jayanagar 5th Block, Bangalore – 560 041. Through PA holder Sri. Krishna Rao Joshi S/o Late Ranga Rao, Aged about 65 years, No.228, 11th B Main Road, Classic Paradise Street, Begur, Bangalore South, Bangalore – 560 068. …Complainant V/S. M/s Shri Aishvaryaa Down Town, No.119/18, 3rd Floor, 80 Feet Road, Siddaiah Puranik Road, Near Pavithra Paradise, Basaveswaranagar, Bangalore – 560 079. …Opposite Party Represented by its Managing Partner Sri. L.F. Patil. (Advocate: Sri. Purushotham.G.) O R D E R SRI. B.S.REDDY, PRESIDENT The complainant filed this complaint through his Power of Attorney u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act of 1986 seeking direction against Opposite Party (herein after called as OP) to register the plot No.188 within a month, in default to refund the advance sale consideration of Rs.2,25,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. along with compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- on the allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the OP. 2. The case of the complainant to be stated in brief is that: On 18.02.2008 the complainant entered into an agreement to purchase a site bearing No.188 in the layout formed by OP for a total consideration of Rs.5,62,500/- and paid an amount of Rs.2,25,000/- as advance sale consideration. The remaining consideration amount was agreed to be paid at the time of executing the sale deed and it was agreed that the sale deed is to be executed within month of the approval of the layout. The complainant mobilized the funds towards payment of balance consideration and was waiting the response from OP regarding the layout approval but OP has not responded. For the registered letter dated 22.04.2009 OP has not replied. For another registered letter dated 13.08.2009 OP has not given any reply. The layout plan has not been approved; the complainant has addressed a registered letter dated 25.09.2009 to the OP, no reply has been received for the said letter. Thus the complainant felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP and filed the complaint seeking necessary reliefs as stated above. 3. On appearance OP filed version admitting that that the complainant has entered into an agreement to purchase the site and paid the advance sale consideration of Rs.2,25,000/- on 18.02.2008. It is stated that the Government prohibited conversion of lands for temporary period, recently that ban is lifted. OP got conversion order of the land to non agricultural purpose and he has applied for approval of the layout before the planning authority; which shall be getting within 45 days and OP is willing to execute the sale deed within 30 days from the date of approval. The complainant approached this Forum with malafide intention without any cause of action. Hence it is prayed to dismiss the complaint with costs. 4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments the P.A. holder of the complainant filed affidavit evidence and produced documents. The Managing Partner of OP filed affidavit evidence and produced documents in support of the defence version and filed the written arguments. Heard from complainant side, the written arguments filed by OP was considered as arguments advanced. 5. Points that arise for our consideration are:- Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant has Proved the deficiency in service on the part of the OP? Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the relief’s now claimed? Point No. 3 :- To what Order? 6. We record our findings on:- Point No.1:- Affirmative Point No.2:- Affirmative in part Point No.3:- As per final Order. R E A S O N 7. At the outset it is not at dispute that the complainant entered into an agreement with OP to purchase a site bearing No.188 measuring 30’ X 50’ for a total consideration of Rs.5,62,500/- and paid an amount of Rs.2,25,000/- as advance sale consideration and got executed the agreement deed. That agreement deed provides that the purchaser shall pay the balance of Rs.3,37,500/- within one month from the date of approval. Though the complainant has paid advance sale consideration of Rs.2,25,000/- on 18.02.2008 but OP has not taken any steps to get the layout plan approved and execute the sale deed. The complainant has written 3 registered letters dated 22.04.2009, 13.08.2009 and 25.09.2009, but OP has not taken care to reply for any of the letters with regard to the steps taken to complete the transaction. Now OP has come up with defence that the lands are being converted to non agricultural purpose and application is filed for approval of the layout plan. After the approval of the layout within a month sale deed will be registered. The very fact of OP in not replying registered letters of the complainant with regard to the progress of the project amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Further the conversion order copies produced by OP reveals that the said order is dated 20.11.2009. After the conversion order OP has applied for approval of the layout as contended and OP is prepared to execute the sale deed. Taking into consideration of all the facts and circumstances we are of the considered view that the ends of justice would be met by directing OP to execute the sale deed within one month from the date of this order. In default to refund the sale consideration with interest at 9% p.a. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: O R D E R The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed in part. OP is directed to execute the registered sale deed in respect of plot bearing No.188 formed in “Aishvaryaa Down Town” DTCP layout measuring 30’ X 50’ within one month from the date of this order at the cost of the complainant after receiving the balance consideration of Rs.3,37,500/-. In default OP is directed to refund the advance sale consideration of Rs.2,25,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of agreement deed till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant. Send the copy of this order to both the parties free of cost. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 9th day of June 2010.) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Snm: