KAVITHA NILAYAM FLAT OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs. BOPPANA CONSTRUCTIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the unsuccessful complainant in C. D. 548/2005 before the District Forum II, Hyderabad, wherein, the complainant filed seeking a direction against the opposite parties to supply all the relevant documents including link documents pertaining to the land bearing No. 1, 2 and 3 in Layout Survey No. 30, 31 and 34 admeasuring 600 Sq. yards at Subash nagar, Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad was dismissed. The impugned order is assailed as erroneous and sought it to be set aside.

(2.) The facts of the case disclose that the complainants are the flat owners and they formed as an Association in respect of the flats purchased in Kavitha Nilayam situate at Subash nagar, Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad which was built by OP. 1 firm and sold to them. It is stated that 11 flats were purchased by the owners and the same were registered on different dates by taking possession of the same. Individual owners of the flats have requested the opposite parties to supply the link documents and original documents pertaining to the property on which flats were constructed. The second opposite party informed them that the documents would be handed over to the Registered Association of the flat owners but not to the individual owners. All the flat owners have formed into Kavitha Nilayam Flat Owners Welfare Association and registered the same by electing office bearers. Subsequently,. the President had requested the opposite parties to hand over the documents in question and also addressed registered letters on 03.11.2004 and 03.12.2004. Even then, the opposite parties failed to handed over it. A legal notice dated 06.05.2005 was also sent which was returned as unclaimed. It shows that the opposite parties are not receiving the notice so as to avoid to fulfill their obligations. As per the provisions of the A. P. Apartments ( promotion of construction and ownership ) Act of 1987 and the rules there under, the builders owners have responsibility to hand over the original link documents. Hence it amounts to violation of it. The opposite parties with malafide intention retained the documents in question. Hence prayed to direct the opposite parties to hand over the original link documents pertaining to the property in question.

(3.) The first opposite party filed counter affidavit and it was adopted by the second opposite party.