M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) The opposite parties are the appellants.
(2.) The first complainant/first respondent (herein after called complainant] was allotted a house by the opposite parties, bearing Door No.A1-48/5/663, as per the proceedings dated 28.03.94 and possession was also handed over to him on 13.6.94. Thereafter, obtaining permission, additional construction was put up by the complainant, not affecting the existing structure, since the additional construction was not put up upon the building. The total amount, as agreed, was paid on 29.3.96. After the entire payment, though, the complainant had requested the opposite parties to execute the sale deed, the opposite party failed and neglected to execute the sale deed, thereby committed negligent and deficiency. For the past six months, the roof of the building is falling, exposing the rusting rod, threatening, even the collapse of the terrace, for which, a complaint was lodged and no action has been taken. In order to rectify these defects in the construction, the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,25,000/-, in addition to, a sum of Rs.15,000/- for shifting the residence by paying rent, during the period of repair for three months as well a compensation of Rs.50,000/-. Hence, the complaint.
(3.) The opposite parties, admitting the allotment of the house as well the tentative cost paid by the complainant as requested, resisted the complaint, contending that they have not executed the sale deed, because of the non-payment of the final cost or the balance of the amount, that as per the Clause available in the lease-cum-sale agreement, the opposite parties should not be held responsible for any defect, structural or otherwise in the property, that the complaint is clearly barred by time, not maintainable, thereby praying for the dismissal of the complaint.;