Date of filing : 18.02.2016.

IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

Present: Hon’ble Thiru Justice R.SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT C.C. No.45 of 2016 Friday, the 28^th day of March, 2025 Dr.Manju Sree, W/o Mr.Devanand Mahadeva, Rep. by her Power of Attorney Agent Mr.R.Dharmalingam, S/o Ramasamy Pillai, Flat No.T5, A Block, Thangam Avenue, Ammamandapam Road, Srirangam - 620 006. … Complainant Vs.

M/s. Sree Daksh Property Developers (India), Private Limited, No.1, Gandhi Layout, Sri Veeras Tower, First Floor, Maruthamalai Main Road, Coimbatore-641 046, Rep. by its Director Mr.N.Ganesan, S/o Late V.Natarajan, Door No. 18, Sasthri Nagar, Karuppa Gounder Thottam, Sulivan Street, Coimbatore - 641 001. ... Opposite Party For Complainant : M/s.A.Tamilarasan For Opp. Parties : M/s.Lavanya Shankar This Complaint came up for final hearing on

18.03.2025, and after hearing the arguments of the counsel for the complainant and the opposite party and on perusing the materials on record, this Commission passes the following:- O R D E R R.SUBBIAH, J-PRESIDENT The present complaint has been filed Under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as against the Opposite Party for the following reliefs:

(i) To direct the opposite party to put an end to the deficiency in service by: (a) Obtaining approval for the constructions; (b) Completing the constructions by carrying out the work undone estimated to be Rs.10,00,000/- and hand over the Villa to the complainant or, in the alternative direct the opposite party to pay Rs.10,00,000/- to the complainant as damages for non completion of the Villa;

(ii) To pay damages of Rs.50,00,000/- for the deficiency of service;

(iii) To pay Rs.50,000/- towards costs.

2. The case of the complainant is that the complainant is a medical professional. She is a citizen of India and at present, she is residing at Dubai. The opposite party is a company carrying on real estate development, promotion and construction business. They are rendering real estate service as defined in Section 2(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The complainant desirous of acquiring a Villa type residential house for herself. At this juncture, the opposite party approached the complainant and offered to construct a Villa for the complainant in their project "Sri Daksha's Vridhaa", promoted by the opposite party at Vadavalli, Coimbatore. The opposite party represented that they are the owner of the land of a total area of 14 Acres 34 Cents in various survey numbers in Vadavalli Village; that they had laid out the land into house sites and the layout had been approved by the Director of Town and Country Planning and they have engaged in developing the plots and constructing "Villa" type houses. The opposite party offered to sell and convey plots to the complainant and to construct a Villa type house on the plots for the complainant after getting due approval from the planning authorities. Believing the words of the opposite party, the complainant agreed to acquire two plots bearing Nos. K1 and K2 in the layout together with a Villa to be constructed thereon, from the opposite party. The entire cost of the plots and construction of Villas was agreed to be Rs.85,00,000/-. The complainant paid an advance amount of Rs.50,00,000/- even in November 2013. Though the opposite party received such a huge advance, they did not execute the sale deed or construction agreement. Instead, they utilized the huge amount received by them, for their other activities. They had also utilized the plots K1 and K2 for dumping building materials for carrying out constructions in adjacent plots. After repeated representations by the complainant, the opposite party executed a sale deed in favour of the complainant only on 29.01.2014, registered the sale deed as Document No.454 of 2014 on the file of the SRO, Vadavalli and conveyed the plots to the complainants. On the same day, the opposite party had also entered into a construction agreement with