STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KERALA CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. SC/32/CC/95/2017 ARUN NANDAGOPAN PRESENT ADDRESS - Ayyakulath house, Palarivattom P.O, Mamangalam Kochi ,KERALA.

.......Complainant(s)

Versus PURAVANKARA PROJECTS LTD PRESENT ADDRESS - G- 261 Panampilly avenue, Kochi 682 036. ,KERALA.

.......Opposite Party(s)

BEFORE:

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

NEMO FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTY:

NEMO DATED: 25/07/2025

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM C.C. No. 95/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 25.07.2025 PRESENT:

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN K.R. : MEMBER COMPLAINANTS:

1. Arun Nandagopan, Ayyakulath House, Palarivattom P.O., Mamangalam, Kochi-

682 025.

2. Sunitha Chandran Akathre, W/o Arun Nandagopan, Ayyakulath House, Palarivattom P.O., Mamangalam, Kochi-682 025.

(By Adv. S. Reghukumar)

Vs.

OPPOSITE PARTIES:

1. M/s Puravankara Projects Ltd., G-261, Panampilly Avenue, Kochi-682 036 represented by its Managing Director.

2. The Managing Director, M/s Puravankara Projects Ltd., G-261, Panampilly Avenue, Kochi-682 036.

(By Adv. Jolly John)

JUDGMENT

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D. : JUDICIAL MEMBER This is a complaint filed under Sec. 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2. The Puravankara Projects Ltd. and its Managing Director are the opposite parties. They are engaged in the construction of the apartment. On 19.09.2007, the complainants had entered into agreements with the opposite parties for the sale of undivided share in the land comprising in 104.9578 Ares and construction of the apartment having a super built area of 1456.04 sq. ft. The construction has to be completed within 30 months from the date of obtaining commencement certificate for the project from the relevant authority. The complainants were made to believe that the opposite parties had already obtained the building permit from the Corporation of Cochin and assured that the construction would be completed by November 2009 and th a three bed room apartment bearing No. 805 on the 8 floor in the GC Block with covered car parking area be handed over to the complainants. The total consideration was fixed as Rs. 59,42,300/- (Rupees Fifty Nine Lakh Forty Two Thousand Three Hundred only). The complainants started payment of the amount as and when demanded by the opposite parties. But the construction was progressing in a slow manner and the progress was not in accordance with the payment schedule. By 28.03.2009, the complainants had paid an amount of Rs. 44,00,609/- (Rupees Forty Four Lakh Six Hundred and Nine only). The complainants had to avail loan also for effecting the payments. The construction was unduly delayed. Despite having received 74% of the amount, the opposite parties never cared to complete the project. The opposite parties had siphoned the amount to other projects. Though 74% of the amount was collected, the structure was not even completed. On account of the compulsion of the complainants, the sale deed was executed on 27.01.2015. There is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the side of the opposite parties in causing undue delay in completing the work. The opposite parties ought to have paid the interest for the amount of Rs. 44,00,609/- (Rupees Forty Four Lakh Six Hundred and Nine only)received by them. The complainants would seek for interest @ 18% for the amount of Rs. 44,00,609/- (Rupees Forty Four Lakh Six Hundred and Nine only)from 07.09.2007 till payment. The complainants would also seek for realization of compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh only) and Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) as litigation costs.

3. The opposite parties had filed a written version. They would admit the execution of the agreements and also the registration of the sale deed in favour of the complainant. According to them, the complaint has been filed as an afterthought with a view to gain illegal enrichment. The complaint is not maintainable