G.G. Loney, President - Since the aforesaid thirty complaints are against the same opposite party and since there is a common grievance in all these complaints, all these complaints are disposed off by this common order. All the thirty complainants except three in number are Railway employees. They are members of Deepaknagar Housing Society which was organised by opposite party No.1 viz., Nagpur Beghar Mitra Grihanirman Sahakari Sanstha Ltd., for short, hereinafter referred as' Society'. The opposite party No.1, the opposite party No.2, New Nagpur Builders Pvt. Ltd., represented by M/s. Nanda Tikle is the 'Builder'. O.P. Nos. 3 to 6 are the owners of the land admeasuring 7.20 acres bearing identification of Khasra No. 166/3/4 at Borgaon, District Nagpur. They inherited aforesaid land from their late father. They all executed ~ power of attorney in favour of the O.P. No.1 in October, 1989. The aforesaid land being covered under the provisions of Urban Land Ceiling on Holdings & Regulation Act, 1976, they had obtained an exception from the Government of Maharashtra under an order dated 28.2.1989 and 5.9.1989 for purposes of construction of houses. The opposite parties orally advertised among the public in general that the aforesaid land is being utilised for public purpose i.e. for construction of low income group and middle income group tenements. It was also advertised that the Railway employees would be included in the scheme of houses.

2. A separate agreement dated 22.11.1989 came to be executed between each complainant and opposite party No.1, which are marked as Anx. 'I' and 'II'. Anx.1 is an agreement for providing additional amenities in favour of complainants. Out of 30 tenements, some tenements were admeasuring 60 sq. meters at a consideration of Rs. 1,53,525/;- and some tenements were for an area of 27 sq. meters for a consideration of Rs. 65,000/-. Each complainant paid to O.P. No.1 his share of consideration from his own funds and from the funds obtained by way of loan from Railway Department. The opposite parties by the aforesaid agreements had agreed to place the complainants in possession of their respective tenements on or before 30.6.1990 as shown in the chart.

3. All the complainants in their respective complaints alleged that till the date of filing of these complaints i.e. on 15.4.1993, the construction work has not been completed by the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 and thus they failed to render the promised service in terms of the agreement') resulting in deficiencies in their service. It is alleged by the complainants that even the plinth level construction is not made in respect of some tenements and whatever the plinth level construction is made in respect of some tenements is now deteriorating. It is also alleged that at some palces, the walls are broken and bricks are lying scattered. It is further alleged that builder not only used poor quality building material for the construction made but has been hopelessly deficient in performance of the agreement for construction of the tenements. It is also alleged that abruptly and illegally, the builder stopped the work of construction. The complainants further alleged that when they approached the opposite parties about their grievance of delay and incomplete construction of houses and poor quality of building material, the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 gave them evasive and false assurances stating that they would change the plan sanctioned by the authorities. But ultimately failed to do so till the filing of these complaints. The complainants therefore, alleged that due to the negligence in the performance of promised service, it has resulted in the deficiencies in the promised service. The complainants, therefore, filed these complaints and claimed compensation on various counts.

4. A chart showing the details about the name of the complainant, tenement number, consumer complaint number, agreed cost, amount paid to the opposite parties, the date of posses