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

P.D.SHENOY, R.K.BATTA
G. L. Narasimham – Appellant
Versus
B. S. Venkateswarulu – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. T.N. Rao, Mr. M. Mahapatra, Advocates.

ORDER

R.K. Batta, Presiding Member—The facts of the case in brief are that the complainant Sri B..S. Venkateswarlu had purchased flat No. 101 for Rs. 4,95,000/- payable in instalments from M/s. Kanyam Constructions, Hyderabad. He had paid Rs. 50,000/- at the time of execution of agreement of sale on 14.2.1997 and further paid Rs. 2,25,000. It is the case of the complainant that he had obtained housing loan of Rs. 3,00,116/-, out of the total sanctioned amount of Rs. 5,22,616/- and as per the terms of agreement, actual possession of the flat was not delivered within two months. Though the complainant was ready to pay the balance amount of Rs.2,20,000/-, the builder did not execute the sale deed. Hence he filed a complaint before the District Forum for direction to the builder and the owner of the property to execute sale deed and award compensation of Rs. 50,000/- with costs.

2. The builder contested stating that the complainant had not paid the balance amount despite notice issued to him. The possession was handed over but the agreement could not be executed due to dispute between the builder and the owner and the owner filed a civil suit in 1998 questioning the terms and conditions


















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