SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 2882

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
B.Rameshwar Goud – Appellant
Versus
1.M/s. Vasavi Builders & Developers – Respondent
SC/36/CC/174/2017



Petitioner Advocates:Ms. M. Deepika Reddy ,Respondent Advocate:

BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION:HYDERABAD (ADDITIONAL BENCH)

C.C.174/2017 Between :

Mr. B. Rameshwar Goud, S/o. Dasharath, Aged about: 49 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.2-12, Kothapet, Rangreddy District.

Complainant And

1. M/s. Vasavi Builders & Developers, Rep. by its Managing Partners, T. Srinivas and P. Srinivas, Office at Flat No.7, P. & T Colony, Medipally, Uppal, Hyderabad.

2. Sri T. Srinivas, S/o. Radhakrishna, Aged about: 36 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.4-494/44, Mothukuru, Nalgonda District.

3. P. Srinivas, S/o. Venkaiah, Aged about: 54 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Plot No.127, Old Vasavi Nagar, Kharkhana, Secunderabad.

…Opp. Parties Counsel for the Complainants : M/s. Nerusu Srinivasa Rao Counsel for the Opposite parties : M/s. Pramod Kumar Kedia &

CC No.175/2017 Between :

Smt. B. Praveena, W/o. B. Rameshwar Goud, Aged about: 43 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No.2-12, Kothapet, Rangreddy District.

Complainant And

1. M/s. Vasavi Builders & Developers, Rep. by its Managing Partners, T. Srinivas and P. Srinivas, Office at Flat No.7, P. & T Colony, Medipally, Uppal, Hyderabad.

2. Sri T. Srinivas, S/o. Radhakrishna, Aged about: 36 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.4-494/44, Mothukuru, Nalgonda District.

3. P. Srinivas, S/o. Venkaiah, Aged about: 54 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Plot No.127, Old Vasavi Nagar, Kharkhana, Secunderabad.

…Opp. Parties Counsel for the Complainants : M/s. Nerusu Srinivasa Rao Counsel for the Opposite parties : M/s. Pramod Kumar Kedia QUORUM: HON’BLE SRI KOLLA RANGA RAO- PRESIDING OFFICER-

MEMBER - (JUDICIAL)

HON’BLE SMT.R.S.RAJESHREE, MEMBER (NON JUDICIAL)

&

HON’BLE SRI V.V.SESHUBABU, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND TWENTY SIX

COMMON ORDER

(PER HON’BLE SRI V.V.SESHUBABU, MEMBER-JUDICIAL)

1. The above complaints are filed U/s. 17 (1) (a) (i) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, by the husband and wife respectively seeking direction against the Opposite Parties to pay rent @Rs.4,000/- per month for a period from 29.07.2016 to 01.02.2017; for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-; to pay the difference existing rent @Rs.4,000/- per month for a period from 29.07.2016 to 01.02.2017; to refund Rs.2,00,000/- collected towards LRS with interest @Rs.18% p.a., from the date of receipt till payment; to refund Rs.2,00,000/- with interest @18% p.a., from 11.03.2014 till repayment for the amount received towards construction of duplex house; to reimburse Rs.3,60,000/- incurred by the Complainant No.1 for arranging shelves, colours to the wall, erection of grills etc., with interest @18% p.a., from the date of complaint till realization; to complete amenities like multipurpose hall, gymnasium, back up generator, children play area, intercom system, quality lift as promised and to pay costs of Rs.25,000/-.

2. The brief averments of the complaint in CC 174/2017 are that the Complainant is the absolute owner in possession of two plots to an extent of 324 and 276 Sq.yards, both are adjacent to each other having purchased them under registered sale deed bearing document No.9744/2008 before SRO, Rangareddy, East; that the Opposite party No.1 partnership firm represented by Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 who are the managing partners; that on 12.10.2012 the Complainants have entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Opposite Parties for the construction of residential flats in the ratio of 45:55 respectively; that the Complainant and his wife are entitled for 06 flats towards their share along with undivided share in the land; that the flat Nos.303, 305, 403 & 504 are to be given to the share of Complainant; that both parties have entered into a registered development agreement-cum-general power of attorney (herein after will be called as DAGPA) on 18.10.2012 vide document No.12925/2012 before SRO, Rangareddy, East; that the Opposite Parties having agreed to the terms and conditions of the DAGPA have to obtain necessary permissions and sanctions from the competent authoriti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top