SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

P.RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU, MAMATA LAKSHMANNA
S. KRISHNA – Appellant
Versus
S. MALLA REDDY – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsels for the Parties :
For the Complainant :Mr. S. Krishna, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party :Mr. P.M. Gopal Rao, Advocate.

ORDER

Mr. Justice P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President—The complainant entered into an agreement for sale with the opposite party for purchase of Flat No. C7 in second floor admeasuring 987 sq. ft. including 213 sq. ft. of common area together with undivided share of 22 sq. yards of land on 15.7.1996 for a consideration of Rs. 2,65,000/- and paid the entire consideration including registration charges of Rs. 35,000/-. Though the opposite party promised to hand over the finished flat in the second floor with all amenities including lift, marble flooring, separate electrical transformer, 3 phase power supply, etc., in November, 1996 itself, but failed to hand over the same and started demanding escalation charges. However, instead of entering into a quarrel and litigation with the opposite party the complainant agreed to pay an additional sum of Rs. 2,45,000/- towards marble stone, teakwood in bed room and wardrobe, kitchen and sliding shutters to cover the loft with plywood, and granite kitchen platform as well as drinking water. Even then the opposite party provided only country wood and the windows without panes. Windows and doors are left without bolts, hinges etc. Though it is promise




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top