TEEGALA NOOKA SATYANARAYANA SETTY Vs. DEVARAPALLI RAJESH MARTIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite party is the appellant. The appellant challenges by way of filing the appeal the order passed by the District Forum on the ground that the complainant has not paid the amount in installments as per the schedule as also the amount of Rs.1,15,120/- towards the extra work that has been mentioned in the report of the advocate commissioner. The opposite party by mistake has filed the supplementary agreement entered into with Hymathi instead of filing the supplementary agreement entered into between the complainant and the opposite party. The complainant has admitted vide the rejoinder ExA9 that he was due certain amount for the extra or additional work carried out by the opposite party.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainant purchased an extent of 34 sq.yards together with the foundation of residential flat bearing no.S1 in second floor through registered sale deed dated 26-12-2002. The complainant entered into construction agreement with the opposite party for construction of the flat for an amount of Rs.2,32,650/- where under it was agreed that the opposite party would construct the flat and deliver its possession to the complainant within 15 months with a grace period of 3 months from the date of agreement. The complainant obtained loan and paid a sum of Rs.90,000/- on 10-07-2003 to the opposite party. The banker of the complainant refused to release the balance loan amount on the ground that the opposite party has no exclusive rights over the property and the copy of the blue print of the approved plan was not submitted . The complainant got issued notice on 12-05-2004 for which the opposite party issued reply dated 02-07-2004 stating that he would hand over the possession of the flat if the complaints pay the contractual amount and the amount incurred for carrying out the extra work. The opposite party got issued notice dated 20-12-2004 with a demand to pay Rs.3,10,441/-. The complainant paid a total amount of Rs.2,32,640/- and found that the opposite party had handed over an extent of 885 sq.yards instead of 940 sq.yards of the land. The complainant was subjected to mental agony for there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

(3.) The opposite party resisted the claim contending that the complainant has not paid the amount as per the terms of the development agreement though he has carried out the entire work entrusted to him. The construction of the flat was completed on 26-06-2004. As per the terms of the development agreement the complainant has not paid the interest, an amount of Rs.67,232/-. The complainant has not paid the amount of Rs.1,15,120/- towards the expenditure incurred by the opposite party for carrying out the additional work as per the instructions of the complainant. Hence, the possession of the flat was not handed over to the complainant.