Mr. Justice D.R. Vithal Rao, President— In this complaint, under Section 17 read with Section 12 of the Act, the complainant has sought direction to opposite party Nos. 5 & 6, the Builders, to handover the possession of the Flat bearing No. B-002 in the ground floor of the Multistoreyed building constructed on the ‘Schedule A’ property, facing Setlur Road, described in `Schedule-B’ and also a compensation of a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- from opposite party Nos. 5 to 7.

2. Opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 are the owners of the land. Opposite party Nos. 4, 5 and 6 are the builders.

3. It is the case of the complainant that opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 entered into an agreement with opposite party No. 4 to develop the land bearing No. 4, Setlur Street, Langford Town, Bangalore, described in Schedule-A, attached to the complaint. It was agreed to construct a multistoreyed residential apartments known as ‘Supreme Residency’.

4. The complainant entered into an agreement with opposite party No. 4 for the purchase of a flat, the Ground floor apartment bearing No. B-002, facing Setlur Road, as described in Schedule-B of the complaint for a sum of Rs. 9,03,125/- in addition to which the complainant was to make payment of a sum of Rs. 2,75,000/- to opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 for the sale of undivided interest in the land. The complainant made payment of a sum of Rs. 5,04,550/- to opposite party No. 4.

5. The construction of the flat though started after a very long time, but even thereafter, the progress of the work was very slow.

6. In the meanwhile, it is the further case of the complainant that opposite party No. 5 took over the further development of the property from opposite party No. 4 and informed the complainant that the balance amount was to be paid to opposite party No. 5.

7. Opposite Party No. 5 by their letter on 1.6.94 informed the complainant that ground floor of the building consisted of 4 apartments, namely, Apartment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 and Apartment No. 1 facing Setlur Street, was allotted to opposite party No. 7.

8. It is the grievance of the complainant that opposite party No. 5, though there were only three apartments, made it as four apartments and by its letter informed the complainant that Flat No. 2 in those four apartments was the apartment of the complainant. Apartment No. 2 that was earlier allotted was the apartment facing Setlur Road, but opposite party No. 5 by making four apartments in the Ground Floor, made apartment No. 2, the apartment facing Western side, thereby opposite party No. 5 acted fraudulently in stating that apartment No. 2 facing Western side was the apartment allotted to the complainant. As a matter of fact, the apartment allotted as per the Agreement was Apartment No. 2, facing Setlur Road. Opposite party Nos. 5,6 and 7 have by this Act committed fraud by hatching up criminal conspiracy with a view to deprive the complainant of the apartment facing Setlur Road.

9. The complainant, on the basis of these averments, sought a direction, as referred above, to opposite party Nos. 5 & 6 to handover possession of the Flat bearing No. B-002 in the ground floor of the multi-storeyed building measuring 1175 sq. ft, facing Setlur Road, and also compensation in a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- from opposite party Nos. 5 to 7.

10. Opposite parties filed their version. They denied having committed fraud as averred by the complainant. Opposite party No. 5 admitted the fact that there was an agreement with the complainant and the complainant was allotted a Flat bearing No. 002 on the ground floor of Supreme Residency consisting of a living-cumdining room, two bed rooms, two toilets, a kitchen and a balcony. Opposite party No. 5 further averred that the apartment that was agreed upon to be sold to the complainant was the apartment in the ground floor bearing No. 002 and not the apartment as claimed by the complainant, the apartment situated on the Eastern side facing Setlur Road. Opposite party No. 5 denied the complainant having b