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

M.SHREESHA, D.APPA RAO
Pratty Gopala Rao – Appellant
Versus
Bhavani Agencies – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. N. V. Anantha Krishna, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Dr. P.B. Vijay Kumar, Advocate.

ORDER

M. Shreesha, Member—Aggrieved by the order in C.C. No.153/2005 on the file of District Forum-I Visakhapatnam, the complainant preferred this appeal.

2. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant purchased a flat bearing No.7 measuring 1235 sq. ft. plinth area in Garuda Enclave by virtue of registered sale deed dated 21.4.2003 from the opposite parties and one Garuda Nageswara Rao who was the owner of the land. The complainant submitted that he paid Rs. 5,43,180 towards sale consideration corresponding to 60 sq. yds of joint undivided share and 80% of construction value of the said flat in the third floor. An agreement was arrived at on 21.4.2003 between the complainant and opposite parties in respect of the remaining 20% construction and as per the said agreement, the complainant has to pay Rs. 88,920 for the remaining work. Accordingly the said amount was paid to the opposite parties but the opposite parties demanded Rs. 1,00,000 towards marble flooring, wooden cupboard, Putti and emulsion painting to all internal and external walls. The complainant submitted that he entered into another agreement dated 18.7.2003 and 3rd opposite party and subsequent






















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