IMPORTANT POINT
When the GPA given to the builder is cancelled by a registered document any transaction entered after cancellation is not valid.

This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner K.Revathi against the order dated 23.2.2010 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Andhra Pradesh, (in short ‘the State Commission’) passed in FA No.723 of 2007.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1/complainant and the opposite party/respondent No.2 entered into an agreement of development and as per this agreement the opposite party was entitled to 65% of the developed area. The complainant submits that the opposite party offered to sell to the complainant residential flat no.G-2 on the ground floor with a built up area of 772 sq. feet with undivided share of land to an extent of 22 sq. yards for a total sale consideration of Rs.3,47,400/- and the complainant submits that opposite party entered into an agreement of sale on 7.3.1996 with the complainant according to which the opposite party received a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the complainant by way of cash and the balance out of the total sale consideration of Rs.3,47,400/- was to be paid by way of part payments spread over a period of one year. The complainant subsequently paid an advance amount of Rs.80,000/- on 7.3.1996 and Rs.29,000/- on 31.8.1997 and the opposite party acknowledged the receipt of the total sum of Rs.2,59,000/-. Thereafter the complainant submits that the opposite party offered flat no.T-2 instead of flat no.G-2 for a sale consideration of Rs.3,80,000/- and the complainant agreed for this proposal and executed a fresh agreement of sale on 16.9.1998 and paid the full sale consideration of Rs.3,80,000/- to the opposite party for an area of 850 sq.ft. with undivided share of land admeasuring 37.80sq. yards. The opposite party informed the complainant that the said land belongs to Smt. K. Padmavathi and (respondent No.3) Smt. K. Mangamma (respondent No.4) and the opposite party entered into Development Agreement with them on 14.10.1997. The Complainant submits that the opposite party has been putting off some of the final works like the electrical wiring, final finishing of flooring, bathroom toilets, kitchen and other miscellaneous jobs inspite of collecting the entire sale consideration of Rs.3,80,000/- and the flat was also not delivered to the complainant. Therefore, the complainant issued a legal notice on 25.11.2002. Later, a consumer complaint was filed by the complainant seeking direction to the opposite party to complete the unfinished works and deliver possession of flat no.T-2 on the third floor, to pay Rs.1 lakhs towards damages together with 12% interest on the total sale consideration paid by the complainant and other reliefs. Opposite parties 2 and 3 (respondents No.3 and 4 herein) filed written version stating that the complainant was not a consumer and that the said flat was in possession and enjoyment of Smt. K.Revathi who was a necessary party but she was not impleaded and that the agreement entered into by the complainant was of a different party and the first opposite party (respondent No.2 herein) committed breach of agreement with respect to development of property and the second and third opposite parties had revoked the powers given to opposite party No.1 by a registered deed of cancellation bearing document No.129 of 1999. Hence there was no deficiency in service on their behalf. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hyderabad, (in short ‘the District Forum’) based on the evidence adduced allowed the complaint directing the opposite parties 1 to 3 to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.3,80,000/- along with interest of 9% p.a. from 16.10.1998 untill date of realization along with cost of Rs.2000/-.

3. Aggrieved by the order dated 30.3.2007 of the District Forum, complainant preferred FA No.202 of 2008 and opposite parties Nos.2 & 3 preferred FA No.723 of 2007 before the State Commission. Opposite party No.1, M/s. Soubhagya Constructions did not prefer any appeal. The State Commission vide its order dated 23.2.2010 disposed of t