2. Rayapti Venkata Koteswra Prasad,

        S/o. Subba Rao, Managing Director,

        Of Sri Bala Chamundeswari Constructions

    (P) Ltd, Opp: Hindu Pharmacy College,

        Amaravathi Road, Guntur.

    3. Rayapti. Subba Rao, Director,

        Sri Bala Chamundeswari Constructions (P) Ltd,

        Dr.No. 4-5-5/9, Navabharati Nagar,

        Guntur.                                                      …   Opposite Parties 

      This complaint coming up before us for final hearing on                     17-08-10 in the presence of Sri N. Srinivasa Rao, Advocate for complainant and the opposite parties remained exparte, upon perusing the material on record and having stood over till this day for consideration, this Forum made the following: 

O R D E R

Per Smt.T.Suneetha, Lady Member:

                This complaint is filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the complainant seeking directions on the opposite parties to refund the advance given amounting to Rs.7,50,000/- along with subsequent interest and Rs.2,00,000/- towards  mental agony and legal expenses.

The brief facts of case are that 

     The complainant Dr. Katragadda Suneetha, is resident of Kakinada. 

            The 2^nd opposite party RVK Prasad is the Managing Director of the 1^st opposite party Shri Bala Chamundeswari Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Guntur represented by RVK Prasad.

3^rd Opposite Party is Rayapti. Subba Rao, Director of Sri Bala Chamundeswari Constructions (P) Ltd., Guntur.

                The 1^st opposite party being Construction Company offered to sell the flats to the complainant and issued Brochures containing models of flat which is named as ‘Shakambari Sun City’.                 

                The complainants agreed to purchase a three bed room flat for Rs.25,15,650/- and paid Rs.7,50,000/- in three differed payments.  In this regard the 2^nd opposite party executed sale agreement on 21-05-2007.  Basing on the promises and words complainant  paid part payments as here under:

                The opposite party received amounts from complainants but failed to commence the construction. The non-commencement and non-delivery of promised flat to complainant and retaining the amounts paid by the complainant with them is deficiency of service on part of opposite parties.  The complainant sent a letter to 2^nd opposite party dt.08-04-10 for which no reply was given.  The complainant underwent lot of mental agony and suffering. So, the opposite party is liable to pay the following amounts:

(i) Refund the paid amount of                       Rs.7,50,000/-

(ii) Interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of

     Payment of respective dates                    Rs.5,25,000/-

(iii) Mental agony, Compensation,

      Legal expenses                                     Rs. 1,00,000/-

                                                       ____________________

                                                                Rs.13,75,000/-

                                                     ___________________

                Hence, the complaint.

                The opposite parties are called absent even after service of notice. Hence, they are set exparte. 

                The complainant filed affidavit in support of his arguments and also documents, which are marked as Ex.A1 to A6.  These are receipts given by opposite party for the amounts paid by complainant.

Now the points for consideration are that

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?
2. If so to what relief the complainant is entitled?

POINT No.1

        The complainant booked a flat worth Rs.25,15,650/-with 1^st opposite party on payment of advance amount of Rs.7,50,000/- on 21-05-07 and received an agreement from the opposite party in this regard.  The opposite party neither completed the construction nor delivered the flat.

        The agreement vide Ex.A1 shown acknowledgement of receipt of advance amount of Rs.7,50,000/- along with cheque details.  The receipts issued by the opposite parties which are marked as Exs.A7,A8 & A9. They confirm the payment of the said amount by the complainant.

        Non delivery of the flat and retaining the amount of the complainant amounts to deficiency of service on part of opposite party.  The point is answered accordingly.      

POINT No.2:       Thus as seen from the material on record which is unrebutted the opposite parties have committed deficiency of service and the complainants are entitled for refund of the paid amount, compensation and costs.

                In the result, the complaint is allowed in part in terms as indicated below:

1. The opposite parties shall refund an amount of Rs.7,50,000/- (Rupees Seven lakhs Fifty Thousand) to the complainant along with interest @9% p.a., from the date of payment made by the complainant till the date of realization.
2. The opposite parties are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- towards mental agony, pain and suffering and   Rs.1000/- towards legal expenses to the complainant.
3. The amounts ordered above shall be paid within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which the amounts ordered in Item No.2 shall carry interest @9% p.a., till the date of realization.  

Dictated to Junior Steno, transcribed by her, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum, this the     day of August, 2010.

        Sd/-XXX                       Sd/-XXX                         Sd/-XXX

     MEMBER                                  MEMBER                        PRESIDENT            

          APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

No oral evidence is adduced on either side

                                        DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For Opposite Parties:    NIL     

                                                                         PRESIDENT