M. THANIKACHALAM J, PRESIDENT - (1.) The complainant and the opposite party are the appellants in F.A.No.619/2006 and FA No.210/2007 respectively.
(2.) The parties are referred, as arrayed in the original petition.
(3.) The complainant apartments consist of 12 flats, out of which, 11 flats have been occupied, and one is vacant. The flat owners of the Panagal Apartments entered into separate Builders Agreement, with the opposite party, for construction, with specifications. Some of the owners were occupied in 1991, and some in January 1992. Only after the occupation, the flat owners found the construction to be poor quality, the builder has not followed the specifications given in the construction agreement, verification also revealed, that the defect in the construction were common to all the flats of Panagal Apartments. Therefore, the complainant requested the opposite party, to rectify the defects as per the letter dt.10.11.91, for which the opposite party agreeing to rectify, sent a communication on 28.4.1992, regarding certain defects. In the constructions, there are as many as20 defects, (as detailed in para 6 of the complaint), which the opposite party failed to rectify, despite issuance of notice, pursuant to the construction agreement. The electrical wiring done by the opposite party was not satisfactory. PVC pipes have to be replaced with GI pipes, since PVC pipes started giving problems. Because of the insufficiency of borewell, with sufficient diameter, there was no sufficient water to the flats. As per the plan, the opposite party agreed to construct the car shed in the ground floor, which was later converted as flat, which was sought to be sold, for which the complainant had filed a case in OS No.2684/1993, which is still pending.;