STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KERALA FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/32/A/16/63 MANAGING DIRECTOR M M JOSE M/S JOMER PROPERTIES AND INVESTMENTS PVT LTD PRESENT ADDRESS - XXXIX/2122-C, 2 ND FLOOR JOMER ARCADE SOUTH JUNCTION CHITTOOR ROAD COCHIN 682016 ,KERALA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus M/S JOMER HAVEN APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION SECRETERY M/S JOMER HAVEN APARTMENTS OWNERS ASSOCIATION PRESENT ADDRESS - ILLOM ROAD KOCHI 682016 ,KERALA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D , JUDICIAL MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

NEMO FOR THE RESPONDENT:

NEMO DATED: 20/03/2025

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL No.63/2016 JUDGEMENT DATED : 20.03.2025 (Against the order in C.C.No.150/2013 on the files of DCDRC, Ernakulam)

PRESENT:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA : PRESIDENT KUMAR SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI. K.R. RADHAKRISHNAN : MEMBER APPELLANT:

st M/s Jomer Properties & Investments Pvt. Ltd., XXXIX/2122-C, 1 and nd

2 Floor, Jomer Arcade, South Junction, Chittoor Road, Cochin - 682 016 represented by its Managing Director M.M. Jose, residing at Mathew Vihar, Koonamthai, Edappally P.O., Pin - 682 024 (by Adv. Naveen Thomas)

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

M/s Jomer Haven Apartment Owners Association, Jomer Haven Apartments, Illom Road, Kochi - 682 016 represented by its Secretary (by Adv. J.P. Sandhya)

JUDGEMENT

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER The opposite party in C.C.No.150/2013 on the files of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (the District Commission for short) is the appellant. 2. The complainant is an association of owners’ of apartments in a multi storied apartment complex by name ‘Jomer Haven’. The association is represented by its Secretary. The complainant had alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in the construction of the apartment complex and the common facilities and amenities such as drainage and sewage system. The complainant had sought for the rectification of the defects and also demanded for the prior title deed, the relevant wiring diagram pertaining to the building. According to the opposite party, the documents were with the government authorities and the same will be handed over later. The problems regarding the sewage system, a Memorandum of Understanding was entered into between the parties on 04.03.2011 to rectify the defects and to restore the ground areas dugged up for carrying out the work to the original stage duly tiled and painted. Even though the drainage system was rectified and completed, the opposite party did not restore the ground areas dug up to carry out the works to the original stage and thus the terms of the MOU have been violated. 3. The complainant had caused issuance of a lawyer notice seeking for the completion of the work within seven days. The complainant association obtained quotations to complete the work as the opposite party did not comply with the assurance as agreed in the MOU. Ultimately, the complainant had restored the work through M/s Sama Design & Constructions incurring an expense of Rs.71,162/-(Rupees Seventy One Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Two only). The prior title deed, electrical and plumbing diagrams are yet to be supplied. So the complainant would seek for a direction to the opposite party to pay the expenses incurred by spending Rs.71,162/-(Rupees Seventy One Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Two only) for the rectification of the work. They had also sought for compensation for the mental agony caused to its members. A further direction was also sought for to hand over the prior title deed, approved plan, permit, completion plan, occupancy certificate, electrical and plumbing drawings pertaining to the apartment complex.

4. The opposite party had entered appearance and filed written version by admitting fact that they are the promoter and builder of the residential apartment. According to them, the complaint is not maintainable. The apartment common are