LEELA MENON Vs. MULLOTH AMBADY ENCLAVE A PARTNERSHIP FIRM
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Mulloth Ambady Enclave A Partnership Firm
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE appellants are the complainants in OP No. 224/2005 in the file of CDRF, Ernakulam. The complaint stands dismissed.
(2.) THE complaint has been filed by the complainant on behalf of 9 other apartment owners alleging defective construction and non -compliance of the terms of agreement and for realization of amounts allegedly spent by the complainant and others for rectification of certain defects from the firm and its partners who constructed the flat complex. The complainants have sought for ear marked allotment of garages and for directions to provide sufficient slope to drain out rain water and construction of drains, to provide proper fire extinguishing system, the transfer of maintenance deposit of Rs. 10,000/ - collected from each of the flat owners to the flat owners association for transfer of a sum of Rs. 20,423/ - spent by the complainant and others for sewage pipes rectification to the flat owners association, for return of excess amounts, completion certificate and to pay to the complainant Rs. 15,000/ - spent by her for the rectification of defects of her apartment and Rs. 75,000/ -as compensation and a sum of Rs. 25,000/ -as punitive damages.
(3.) IT is the allegation of the complainant that the flats handed over to the complainant and others 9 in number who are parties to the complaint had a number of defects including cracks on the masonry wall, water logging etc. The complainant had to spent Rs. 15,000/ - for the above repairs. The complainant had paid Rs. 8,67,600/ - towards cost of construction apart from Rs.l lakh for the garage. A sum of Rs. 25,000/ - was paid in addition for electricity and water connection. It was found that the sewage pipes were not connected to the Municipal sewage pipes as a result of which the sewage collected in the neighbouring properties. The Association had to spent Rs. 20,423/ -towards the rectification of the same. The opposite parties in the reply to the Association has admitted the lapses and tendered apologies and offered to rectify the problems at the earliest. Although they had collected its. 1 lakh each from the apartment owners to allot separate garage they have constructed only 15 garages for the 20 apartments. Three of the apartment owners are the opposite parties and their relatives. Hence it is contended that the above persons should not be allotted garages and that the complainants should be provided with garages. Rs. 10,000/ - collected from the flat owners towards maintenance deposit has not been transferred to the Association. For repair of drains a sum of Rs. 1,01,000/ -would be required. For the proper functioning of the fire fighting system Rs. 32,800/ -is required. The records of construction have to be handed over to the owners association. The complainant took possession of the apartments on 13 -09 -2003. When the defects came to her notice demands to repair etc. were made in writing, but without any avail.
The first opposite party is the firm and opposite parties 2 and 3 are mentioned as the partners.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.