BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: HYDERABAD.

FA.NO.746 OF 2022 AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.567 OF 2019, ON THE FILE OF DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION-I, HYDERABAD Between:

Sri Mohammed Waseem Ahmed, S/o.R.M.A.Raoof, Occ: Employee, R/o.Flat No.203, Rainbow Residency, Guddimalkapur, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

....Appellant/Complainant And

1. Mohammed Tafheem, S/o.Mohammed Kaleem Aged about 33 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.9-4-77/A/158, Al-Hasnath Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad, T.S.

2. Mohammed Maqbul Ahmed, S/o.Mohammed Gumhamed, Aged about 33 years, Occ: Private Employee, R/o.H.No.1-6-32, Varidela Kollapur (M), Mahaboobnagar Dist.

3. Abdul Aleem, S/o.Mohammed Iqbal, Aged about 63 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.4-260, Zaffar Nagar, Mancherial (M), Adilabad (Dist.)

4. Mumtaz Begum, W/o.Mohammed Iqbal Aged about 57 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.5-706, Iqbal Ahmed Nagar, Mancherial (M), Adilabad (Dist.)

5. Habeeb Unisa Begum, W/o.Mohammed Kaleem Aged 58 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o.H.No.9-4-77/A/158, Al-Hasnath Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.

6. Mahammed Mahmood Ali (GPA Holder)

S/o.Mohd. Akber Ali, Aged 45 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.19-2-11/28, Misrigunj, Hyderabad.

....Respondents/Opp.Parties Counsel for the Appellant/Complainant : M/s.Gopi Rajesh & Associates Counsel for the Respondents/Opp.Parties : Notice served-R1 & R5 Called absent-R2,R4 & R6 QUORAM:

HON’BLE SMT.MEENA RAMANATHAN…IN-CHARGE PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SRI V.V.SESHUBABU….MEMBER-JUDICIAL WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FOUR *******

Order : (Per Smt.Meena Ramanathan, Hon’ble I/c President)

1. This appeal is filed by the Appellant/Complainant under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, praying this Commission to modify/set aside the orders passed in CC.No.567 of 2019, dated 31.03.2021 on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Hyderabad and allow the appeal and pass such further or other orders as this Commission deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the complaint. The Appellant is the Complainant and the Respondents are the Opposite Parties in CC.No.567 of 2019.

3. The brief facts of the complaint are that – the Complainant, an employee, purchased flat No.203 in 2^nd floor, Rainbow Residency with built up area admeasuring 1153 Sft (including common areas) and car parking of 80 Sft and undivided share of land 30 Sq.Yards out of 636 Sq.Yards in H.No.13-6-429, Plot No.14 (Part) Ploy No.15 in Survey No.205, situated at Guddimalkapur, Hyderabad, T.S. for a total sale consideration of Rs.21,16,000/-

including all amenities and car parking.

4. The Opposite Parties No.1 to 5 are the land owners and have given a GPA in favour of Opposite Party No.6 vide Doc.No.1865/2016 dated 18.04.2016. Registered Sale Deed was executed in favour of the Complainant on 26.07.2016 and he was handed over possession of the said flat in October, 2016.

5. It is the Complainant’s case that he is entitled to 80 Sft car parking in the stilt area of the apartment. Although the Complainant demanded the Opposite Parties to provide the car parking with demarcation, they have not complied till today. The Apartment Welfare Association and the Opposite Parties discussed the issue on 25.06.2018 and yet the matter has not been resolved. Vexed with the attitude of the Opposite Parties and the deliberate postponement of allotting car park slot, the present complaint is filed seeking the reliefs as prayed in the complaint.

6. The Opposite Parties No.1 to 6 remained exparte before the Commission below.

7. During the course of enquiry the Complainant filed evidence affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to A11.

8. The District Commission after hearing and considering the material available on record, allowed the complaint in part directing the Opposite Party No.1 to 6 jointly and severally – to allot to the Complainant, the car parking area of 80 Sft in respect of Flat