STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION OF TELANGANA :

                                           At  HYDERABAD

                                                            FA 558 of 2014

                                                   AGAINST

                 CC No. 267/2013, DISTRICT FORUM, RANGA REDDY

Between :

B. Durga Prasad,

S/o Seetharamaiah,

Aged 66 years, Resident of Flat No. 509,

Laxminarayana Villa,Aramghar X roads,

Khatdan  Village, Rajendranagar Mandal,

Ranga Reddy District – 500 030                   .. Appellant/complainant

And

Sri Surya Prakash, Managing partner of

M/s. Surya prakash & Co, Builder /Ex.President of

Laxmi Narayana Villa, S/o P. Veeraiah, aged 54 years,

Occ : Business, R/o Flat No. 618,

Laxminarayana Villa, Aramghar X roads, Khatdan village

Rajendranagar Mandal, R.R. Dist.               .. Respondent/opposite party

Counsel for the Appellant                            :         Party-in-person

Counsel for the Respondent                         :         Sri G. Prabhakar Reddy

Coram                :

                 Honble Sri Justice B. N. Rao Nalla         …      President

                                           And

                          Sri Patil Vithal Rao              …      Member

                          Thursday, the Sixteenth  Day of November

                                  Two Thousand Seventeen

Oral order : ( per Hon’ ble Sri Justice B.N.Rao Nalla, Hon’ble President )

                                                            ***

1)       This is an appeal  filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act by the unsuccessful complainant   praying this Commission  to set aside the  impugned order dated 30.08.2014  made in CC 267 of 2013  on the file of the  DISTRICT FORUM, Ranga Reddy and allow the appeal.

2)       For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint before the District Forum.

3).      The case of the complainant,   in brief, is that he was allotted  Flat No. 509 in Laxmi Narayana Villa by  the opposite party on 16.06.2006 after receiving Rs.5,00,000/- from him and after receiving the entire amount of Rs.18,00,000/- on 28.07.2009 a sale deed was registered and handed over the same in semi-finished condition. Till date, the balance works are not completed and occupancy certificate was not given to him by the opposite party.   He occupied the flat in January, 2010 and brought several problems to the notice of the builder verbally. In August, 2010 due to heavy rains, water started dripping in the rooms, walls became wet and fungus was formed. Each flat owner is having an extent  of 60 sq. yards of undivided land. Even then, the builder had collected from each flat owner Rs.40,000/- towards car parking.  Their association issued letter on 14.09.2013 and it also filed CC No. 101/2012  before the A.P. State Consumer Commission on the allegations of cheating and misappropriation of funds to a tune of Rs.55,61,400/-. Mean-while, the opposite party sent legal notice on 04.06.2012 claiming an amount of Rs.38,500/- from him towards solar water heating and community gas and in fact, this amount was already collected  along with the initial payment and had issued a small note as “ Initial payment advice”.   In fact, the roof of his flat which was dug for installation of solar water hearing and hoarding has led to damage of the roof and an amount of Rs.3,48,000/- is needed for repairing of roof, walls, marble flooring and skirting in drawing hall, tiles in other rooms, painting and transportation etc  which has to be paid by the builder. He also has to be paid an amount of Rs.3,64,000/-  for several other works along with interest. Legal notices dated 04.06.2012, 08.04.2013 and 23.09.2013 were  sent by the opposite party with false allegations. Hence the complaint to direct the opposite party to pay Rs.3.48 lakhs towards the repairs to be carried out , to pay Rs.3.64 laksh towards excess amount paid and repairs carried out , to pay Rs.2.78 lakhs towards the interest amount, Rs.5.0 lakhs towards compensation for mental agony etc. , to return the registered original sale deed of  the flat no. 509 to the complainant and costs.

4)       The opposite party opposed the above complaint by way of written version,

contending that he denied the payment of Rs.23,00,000/-by the complainant and also incomplete works in his flat and stated that the complainant occupied the flat in January 2007 and not  2010. From 2008 onwards the complainant has given his flat on rent and the tenants are staying. It denied water dripping in the complainant’s flat and  collection of Rs.40,000/- for car parking. He admitted issuance of  notice demanding Rs.38,500/- from the complainant on 4.6.2012. The works in the complainant’s flat were completed and the roof was not dug for installation for solar water system and  hoardings. He need not pay any amount for repairs or other works. It is for the welfare association to rectify the repairs in the complex and if it is internal repairs, he has to get them done. As per clause 22 of the sale deed, the complainant has satisfied with the construction work and hence he is not entitled to claim any damages. The complainant owes Rs.3,00,000/- to them with regard to the sale of the flat. To avoid the said payment, this complaint is filed. There is no deficiency in service on their part. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.

5)       During the course of enquiry before the District Forum, in order to prove his  case, the complainant   filed his evidence affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to A-20 and the opposite party  filed evidence affidavit by reiterating the contents of the written version and also got marked Ex. B1 to B6. Heard both sides.

6)       The District Forum, after considering the material available on record,  dismissed the complaint/

7)       Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant    preferred this appeal before this Commission.

8)       Both sides, have advanced their arguments, ,  reiterating the contents in the appeal grounds, rebuttal thereof. Written arguments of the appellant filed.    Heard both sides.  Ex.A-21 to A33 are marked before this Commission subject to proof of and relevancy.  

9)       The points that arise for consideration are,

(i)       Whether the impugned order as passed by the District Forum suffers from any error or irregularity or whether it is liable to be set aside, modified or interfered with, in any manner?

(ii)      To what relief ?

10).   Point No.1 :

There is no dispute that the appellant/complainant was handed over the   flat bearing No.  No. 509 in Laxmi Narayana Villa by  the respondent/opposite party vide sale deed on 28.07.2009.  The main contention of the appellant/ complainant is that roof of his flat was dug for installation of solar water heating system and hoardings and he sustained loss and therefore   an amount of Rs.3,48,000/- is needed for repairing of roof, walls, marble flooring and skirting in drawing hall, tiles in other rooms, painting and transportation etc. He is also claiming an amount of Rs.3,64,000/- towards completion of unfinished works in his flat. Ex.A5, registered sale deed, would go to show that flat no. 509 in Semi-finished condition was handed over to the appellant/complainant on  28.07.2009 for sale consideration of Rs.8,06,000/-. Counsel for the respondent/opposite party arguing that the appellant/complainant was due an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- towards the balance sale consideration. But Ex.A-3 receipts show that he paid only Rs.16 lakhs to the respondent builder. The appellant/complainant got marked Ex.A-21 to A-33 before this Commission. Ex.A-21 receipt dated 18.02.2010 for Rs.6,000/- for repair of main door and frame, polishing etc. Ex.A-22 receipt dated 18.02.2010 for Rs.13,000/- for completing the semi-finished works of bed room and kitchen, plastering, painting, luppam finish etc. Ex.A-23 receipt dated 09.06.2012 for Rs.15,000/- towards removing the burnt wires, defective MCBs, switches etc and rewiring/replacing the same with new ones in drawing , dining, bed rooms etc. Ex.A-24 and Ex.A-25 are the quotations dated 16.10.2014 and the photographs under Ex.A-33 dated 14.10.2014  would go to show that roof was damaged at various places. However, it cannot be estimated on the basis of the photographs.  The appellant/complainant did not choose to bring the same to the notice of the respondent/opposite party by way of complaint in writing. He did not choose to take steps before the District Forum to appoint any technical expert to assess the loss sustained by him. It is true that the appellant/ complainant had addressed a letter dated 30.09.2010 to the Secretary, LNVWS and brought some problems to his notice and informing that he is a retired employee and living on pension only, his flat is vacant for the past 6 months but he is not a party in the present proceedings and the same was not addressed to the respondent/opposite party builder herein.. From Ex.A13 ad A15 legal notices, wherein, it  alleged  that the appellant/ complainant is still due an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to the respondent builder towards cost of the flat and registration charges and that is the reason why the registered document of his flat was withheld by him. It is not mentioned with regard to the solar system on the roof of the flat of the appellant in his sale deed Ex.A-5 and when it was decided to install the same on the roof of the flat  of the appellant, it is not known whether they have to take consent of the appellant/complainant, for the damage,  if any caused. The appellant contended that damage was caused to the top of the roof, below roof, water flows inside rooms and fungus formed  inside walls etc. due to the installation of solar system. The photographs vide Ex.A33  supports the above averments of the appellant/complainant.   On the basis of  the said photographs and  Ex.A-24 and A-25 quotations, computation of damage cannot be estimated and to assess the said loss it requires estimation of technical expert or Civil Engineer and hence the matter has to be remanded back to the District Forum for fresh disposal.

12).              After considering the foregoing facts and circumstances and also having regard to the contentions raised on both sides,   this Commission is of the view that the matter has to be remanded back to the District Forum for fresh disposal after taking into consideration the evidence, if any, on both sides along with the documents marked before this Commission and if the appellant/complainant prefers  for assessment of the loss sustained by him  by any technical expert or Civil Engineer and  dispose of the same on merits as early as possible  

13).    Point No. 2 :

In the result, the appeal is dismissed remanding the matter back to the District Forum, Ranga Reddy District   for fresh disposal after taking evidence adduced by both parties, if any,  and dispose of the same as early as possible. There shall be no order as to costs.

                                                            PRESIDENT                     MEMBER                                                                           Dated :  16.11.2017.

*kvr

                                        DOCUMENTS MARKED

For the appellant/complainant :

Ex.B-21       :         18.02.2010  :         Receipt for Rs.6,000/-

Ex.B-22       :         18.02.2010  :         Receipt for Rs.13,000/-

Ex.B-23       :         09.06.2012  :         Receipt for Rs.15,000/-

Ex.B-24       :         16.10.2014  :         quotation for repair of roof top

Ex.B-25       :         16.10.2014  :         quotation for repair of flooring

Ex.B-26       :         14.10.2014  :         Sketch 1

Ex.B-27       :         14.10.2014  :         Sketch 2

Ex.B-28       :         14.10.2014  :         Sketch 3

Ex.B-29       :         -                   :         Electricity bills and receipts

Ex.B-30       :         -                   :         MCH notice for water disconnection

Ex.B-31       :         27.05.2012  :         WA Minutes of the  meeting to pay                                                                          Rs.15,000/

Ex.B-32       :         11.06.2012  :         Rs.15,000/- payment receipts

( 3 instalments)

Ex.B-33       :         14.10.2014  :         14 photos

PRESIDENT                     MEMBER                                             Dated :  16.11.2017.