Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

CC/11/663

Vikram Kumar B. Bhojani, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The V.H.B.C. Socity Limited, - Opp.Party(s)

R.Venkatesh,

19 Apr 2012

ORDER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM (Principal)
8TH FLOOR, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BWSSB BUILDING, BANGALORE-5600 09.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/11/663
 
1. Vikram Kumar B. Bhojani,
S/o. Babulal Bhojani,R/at No0. 12, Mount Joy Road, Hanumanthanagar, Bangalore-9,
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

COMPLAINTS FILED ON:02.04.2011

DISPOSED ON:19.04.2012.

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

19th DAY OF APRIL-2012

 

  PRESENT:-  SRI. B.S. REDDY                   PRESIDENT       

                      SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA                     MEMBER              

 

 

COMPLAINT Nos.663/2011

       

Complainant

 

 

    Vikram Kumar B.Bhojani

    S/o Babulal Bhojani,

    Aged about 48 years,

    R/at No.12,

    Mount Joy Road,

    Hanumanthanagar,

    Bangalore-9.

 

    Adv:Sri.B.R.Patil

 

    V/s

 

OPPOSITE PARTY/S

 

1. Viswabharathi H.B.C.S.

    No.35, Rathna Vilas Road,

    Basavanagudi,

    Bangalore-4,

    Rept. By its Secretary

    H.V.Vadiraj.

 

2. Viswabharathi H.B.C.S.

    No.35, Rathna Vilas Road,

    Basavanagudi,

    Bangalore-4,

    Rept. By its President.

 

    Placed Ex-parte.

 

O R D E R

SRI. B.S.REDDY, PRESIDENT

 

The complainant filed this complaint Under Section-12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking direction against the Opposite Parties (herein after called as O.Ps) to put the complainant in possession of the site bearing No.218 measuring 60 X 40 feet in the 3rd Phase of the Vishwabharathi Housing Complex Layout, Hosakerehalli, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore alternatively to refund the sital deposit of Rs.20,000/- with interest at 36% p.a. and to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on the allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

                    

2. In spite of service of notice, Ops failed to appear without any justifiable cause, hence placed ex-parte.

 

3. The complainant filed affidavit evidence to substantiate complaint averments and produced documents.

 

4. Arguments from complainant’s side heard.

 

5.We have gone through the complaint averments, the documents produced and affidavit evidence of the complainant. On the basis of these materials it becomes clear that the complainant became member of OP-Society and paid sale consideration towards site bearing No.218 in 3rd Phase, Girinagar, Bangalore-85 and Ops registered the sale deed on 10.05.1993. Ops also issued the Possession Certificate dt.26.08.2000. The Encumbrance Certificate and Possession Certificate are marked as Document No.2 and 3 and copy of registered sale deed executed by the OP2 is marked as document No.1. After registration of the sale deed the complainant is not put in possession of the said site, in spite of repeated requests. The complainant got issued legal notice dt.17.01.2011 to the Ops, in spite of receipt of the said notice, Ops have not complied the demands. Thus the complainant felt deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and filed this complaint.

 

6. OP1 Society is represented by its Secretary and OP2 the same Society represented by it’s President. Though Ops executed registered sale deed in respect of site bearing No.218 for a sale consideration of Rs.20,000/- and issued the Possession Certificate but the complainant has not been put in possession of the same. The Encumbrance Certificate issued reveals that OP has executed the sale deed in favour of this complainant. In spite of receipt of legal notice, Ops have not complied the demand. The Act of OP in not putting the complainant in possession of site sold amounts to deficiency in service.

 

7. There is no reason to disbelieve the unchallenged affidavit evidence of the complainant and documents produced. The very fact of Ops remaining ex-parte leads to draw inference that Ops are admitting the claim of the complainant. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled for the relief of putting him in possession of site. Alternatively for refund of sale consideration of Rs.20,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. by way of compensation from 10.05.1993 along with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:

O R D E R

       

        The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed in part.

 

Ops are directed to put the complainant in possession of site bearing No.218 measuring 60 X 40 feet in the 3rd Phase of the Vishwabharathi Housing Complex Layout, Hosakerehalli, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore-85.

 

In the event of Op’s inability to put the complainant in possession of the said site to refund an amount of Rs.20,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. from 10.05.1993, till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.

 

This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.

 

Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs.

 

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 19th day of APRIL-2012.)

 

                                                                                                     

 

MEMBER                                               PRESIDENT

 

 

Cs.

 

 

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.