- (1.) Heard Counsel for the petitioner. 1. Pending admission, stay of the warrant of arrest against the Petitioner was granted upon deposit of the entire decretal amount including cost with the District Forum. The said amount has been deposited on 11.8.2010 with the District Forum as informed by Counsel for the Petitioner and copy of the receipt has been placed on record.
(2.) The Complainant Association had approached District Forum in respect of the grievances of the flat owners in K.B. Plaza Apartments. The Association had listed the defects in the construction in paragraph 3 of the Complaint and had complained that they were not provided with original documents. The defects were sought to be rectified as also direction to provide documents or in the alternate compensation of Rs. 9.90 lacs for removal of defects in construction and compensation for not providing documents and information pertaining to K.B. Plaza. The District Forum had appointed retired Superintending Engineer as Commissioner who submitted report on 2.9.2006 on various deficiencies pointed out in the complaint.
(3.) The Respondents had resisted the complaint on various grounds including res judicata as also on merits. The District Forum rejected the plea of res judicata raised by the Opposite Parties, namely, Petitioners. After analyzing the report of the Commissioner, the District Forum rejected the recommendations of the Commissioner in respect of defects set out in Clauses 3(f), 3(g), (h), 3(j) and 3(1). However, the District Forum awarded a sum of Rs. 2,62,500 being the cost to rectify the defects pointed out in the report of the Commissioner in terms of Clauses a, b, c, d, e, i, k and m as it was held that it was not viable for the Opposite Party to rectify the defects The District Forum also directed that documents specified in the complaint, except the original title deed and tax receipt, shall be delivered to the Complainant and if it is found not feasible, the Opposite Party shall pay cost of Rs. 3,000 to secure the certified copies of the said documents. The Opposite Party were also directed to pay litigation cost of Rs. 2,000. This order was challenged by the present Petitioner before the State Commission.;