C.P.SURESH, P.RAMAKRISHNAM RAJU, MAMATA LAKSHMANNA
M. SURYANARAYANA – Appellant
Versus
SHAKUNTALAMMA – Respondent
Mr. Justice P. Ramakrishnam Raju, President—The case of the complainant is that the first opposite party who is the owner of the premises bearing No. 2-2-1167/8/14, situated at Tilak Nagar, Hyderabad admeasuring 650 sq. yards entered into a development agreement with the second opposite party, the builders on 26.8.1992, according to which the second opposite party agreed to construct stilt plus three floors making in all 12 flats with a total constructed area of 10,250 sq. ft. and transfer 40% of the constructed area in favour of the first opposite party. The first opposite party empowered and authorised the second opposite party to enter into agreements with third parties in respect of the remaining share of constructed area.
2. The opposite parties 3 and 4 are partners of second opposite party. The fourth opposite party approached the complainant to purchase flats under construction. Accordingly the complainant agreed to purchase flat No. 304A on 1.5.1993. The total consideration payable for the flat is Rs. 3,11,500/-. Though the complainant has paid the total consideration, the opposite parties did not complete the construction nor delivered possession of the flat. Hence the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.