ORDER (Per A. Gopal Reddy, J.)

In these petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners obtained a Rule from this Court calling upon the respondents to show cause why a writ in the nature of Certiorari should not be issued after calling the records relating to the order of the A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-1st respondent dated 05-12-2008 made in C.D.No.32 of 2006 and to quash the same.

2. A short resume of facts necessary for disposal of the writ petitions is as under:

3. The writ petitioners and respondents 4 and 5 in W.P.No.712 of 2009 (hereinafter 3 called "landowners") have entered into a Development Agreement with Mis. Kamala Builders-3rd respondent, who is the petitioner in W.P.No.3013 of 2009 on 05-07-1997 (hereinafter called "developer") to develop the house property bearing No.1-4/l (New) (Old No.1-33/l) admeasuring 790 square yards or 663.30 square metres in Sy.No.166 situated at Hyder Nagar Village, Balanagar Mandal, Kukatpally Municipality, Rangareddy District.

4. Under the Development Agreement, the developer has to undertake the construction of the proposed residential commercial complex in the schedule property after obtaining necessary permission from the Municipal authorities with its own expenses, for which the landowners shall not have any objection for construction of the same. If the construction of the complex is delayed due to defect in title of the landowners, they shall reimburse all the losses suffered by the developer; whereas the landowners undertake not to sell or alienate the suit schedule property. The developer shall undertake total responsibility of the construction of the said complex and discharge of the loans and charges; whereas the landowners shall not in any way be made responsible or liable for defects of the developer in constructing the complex. In case, the landowners suffer any loss as a result of the defective construction undertaken by the developer, the latter i.e. developer was held liable to the extent of loss so suffered. After completion of residential/commercial complex the developer has to deliver 40% of the super built up area inclusive of all common areas, balance areas and circulation areas to the land owners and the developer is entitled to remaining 60% and has a right to alienate the same to the prospective purchasers. The specifications to be provided and share of flats, which the landowners are entitled to, 1 are enclosed as per Annexure-I to the deed. The landowners authorised the developer to procure the customers for flats/shops and garages and also to enter into agreement of sale with such customer, collect advances and issue valid receipts to such purchasers of flats. Extra floors, if any, constructed over and above the agreed area are agreed to be shared at the ratio of 40:60 between the landowners and developer. It was specifically agreed that the landowners shall not be held responsible for any defects in construction and the developer shall alone be responsible for such defects and shall be answerable to the third parties and also the landowners. For the said purpose, land owners agreed to execute a General Power of Attorney (GPA) and get it registered in favour of developer or its nominee to enable it to make application and obtain permissions and sanction from MCH, Electricity Department, Water Supply Departments and any other department to enable the developer to enter into agreement of sale or execute registered sale deed in respect of un-divided share of land and flats proposed to be constructed on the schedule property excluding portion reserved to the landowners together with the corresponding land. The developer was permitted to enter into separate contracts in his own name with building contractors, architects and others for carrying out the construction at his risk and cost.

5. In view of Development Agreement, the developer entered into an agreement of sale with the complainant i.e. 2nd respondent in W.P.No.71

Click Here to Read the rest of this document