BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.

F.A.No.460 OF 2019 AGAINST ORDERS IN C.C.244/2017., DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION-I, HYDERABAD Between:

1. Mr. G. Ram Babu, S/o. Late G. Anjaneyulu, Aged 50 years, Occ: Govt. Service, 2. Smt. G. Nalini Vijaya Sri, W/o. Sri. G. Ram Babu, Aged 44 years, Occ: Housewife, Both R/o. Flat No.302, H.No. 1-3-176/35/22/8/A, Bhagyalaxmi Nagar, Kavadiguda, Hyderabad – 500080.

...Appellants/ Complainants And:

1. M/s. Mitra Constructions, A Partnership Firm, Having its Office at Plot No.23, Chandulal Bowli, Tadbund, Secunderabad – 500009, Rep. by its Managing Partner, 2. Sri. Dheeraj Malani, S/o Sri. Ghanshyam Malani, Managing Partner, M/s. Mitra Constructions, Aged about 41 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Villa No.47, Oorjita Grand Vie, Gundlapochampally, Kompally, R.R District.

3. Sri. G. Rama Krishna Rao, S/o. Sri. G. Sree Rama Murthy, Aged about 73 years, Occ: Retd. Employee.

R/o. H.No.1-3-176/35/22, Plot No.8/A, Kavadiguda, Hyderabad – 500080.

……..Respondents/Opposite Parties Counsel for the Appellants/Complainants: M/s. S.Leo Raj Counsel for the Respondent No.1&2/Opposite Party No.1&2:

Mrs. Zehra Rasheed Counsel for the Respondent No.3/Opposite Party No.3 : Mr. Shaik Altaf QUORUM :

HON’BLE SMT. MEENA RAMANATHAN, I/c PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SRI. V.V. SESHU BABU, MEMBER – (JUDICIAL)

TUESDAY, THE 25^th DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FOUR **********

ORDER: (PER HON’BLE SRI. V.V.SESHU BABU, MEMBER – JUDICIAL) 01. This appeal is filed by the complainants U/s 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 aggrieved by the order of dismissal of the complaint without costs, dated 08.07.2019 in CC NO.244/2017 by the DCDRC-I Hyderabad.

02. The brief averments of the complaint are that they have purchased flat No.302 in the third floor of “Sri Sai Ram Nivas” situated at Bakaram Village from the opposite parties under agreement of sale dated 28.05.2015; that the extent of the property is 1024 sft of built up area with undivided share of land of 41.66 sq yards out of 247 sq.yards with one car parking; that the total consideration was fixed at of Rs.36,00,000/- and the complainants have paid Rs.9,00,000/- as advance under different cheques; that they have obtained housing loan from ICICI Bank, which disbursed Rs.20,00,000/- and balance of Rs.2,00,000/- was agreed to be paid, after handing over of completion certificate; that the opposite parties have executed a registered sale deed on 08.07.2015 for a semi-finished flat; that the opposite party No.2 is the managing partner in Opposite Party No.1 firm; that Opposite Party No.3 is the land owner who entered into development agreement cum GPA on 05.12.2014 vide document NO.3484/2014; that as per the said development agreement the opposite parties 1 & 2 shall provide municipal water connection; to complete all the works and shall provide occupancy certificate, but they have failed to do so, in spite of several requests; that the opposite parties have used substandard material in making the construction as against the specification mentioned in the development agreement; that the complainants got issued a legal notice on 31.03.2017, which was received by Opposite Party No.2 for which reply notice dated

05.05.2017 was given with false averments; hence, the complaint.

03. The brief averments of written version of Opposite Parties No.1&2 are that the complaint is not maintainable either on facts or under law; that the complainants are put to strict proofs of all the averments made in the complaint except those that are admitted; that obtaining the development agreement from the Opposite Party No.3, entering into agreement of sale with the complainants and execution of sale deed in favour of the complainants is admitted; that without paying the full consideration, the complaint is filed to make a wrongful gain; that the opposite parties got restored the water connection and all the inmates of the apartments are using the municipal water and paying bills; that as