M.SURYANARAYANA Vs. SHAKUNTALAMMA
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Click here to view full judgement.
P.RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU,PRESIDENT -
(1.) THE case of the
complainant is that the first opposite party who is the owner of the
premises bearing No. 2 -2 -1167/8/14, situated at Tilak Nagar, Hyderabad
admeasuring 650 sq. yards entered into a development agreement with the
second opposite party, the builders on 26.8.1992, according to which the
second opposite party agreed to construct stilt plus three floors making
in all 12 flats with a total constructed area of 10,250 sq. ft. and
transfer 40% of the constructed area in favour of the first opposite
party. The first opposite party empowered and authorised the second
opposite party to enter into agreements with third parties in respect of
the remaining share of constructed area.
(2.) THE opposite parties 3 and 4 are partners of second opposite party. The fourth opposite party approached the complainant to purchase
flats under construction. Accordingly the complainant agreed to purchase
flat No. 304A on 1.5.1993. The total consideration payable for the flat
is Rs. 3,11,500/ -. Though the complainant has paid the total
consideration, the opposite parties did not complete the construction nor
delivered possession of the flat. Hence the complainant seeking for a
direction to the opposite parties to complete the construction and hand
over possession of the flat to him by executing a registered sale deed
for the undivided share of land and also to pay an amount of Rs. 18,000/ -
p.a. till delivery of possession, to pay compensation of Rs. 1 lakh for
the inconvenience caused due to delay or in the alternative to return the
amount of Rs. 3 lakhs paid with interest at quarterly rests at 20%, award
compensation of Rs. 1 lakh towards mental agony, and Rs. 50,000/ - towards
loss of rent.
(3.) IN the written version filed by the first opposite party while admitting the agreement dated 26.8.1992 stated that the second opposite
party has to deliver possession of her share of land within 12 months to
her from the date of taking vacant possession of the property. However,
the second opposite party paid only a sum of Rs. 1 lakh on signing the
agreement and committed breach by not paying the balance of Rs. 2 lakhs
within the stipulated period and in case of failure the first opposite
party will be constrained to cancel the agreement. As second opposite
party committed default of the terms of the agreement dated 26.8.1992,
she cancelled the said agreement by its letter dated 5.4.1995. Thereafter
the first opposite party herself completed the construction of 7 flats
which were assessed by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad.
In O.S. No. 1645/1997 on the file of XI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, it was found that the second opposite party
is the actual defaulter, whereupon the second opposite party preferred
C.M.A. No. 184/1997 and also sought for temporary injunction in I.A. No.
297/1997 which was rejected.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.