Back
BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTESS
REDRESSAL COMMISSION:HYDERABAD
(ADDITIONAL BENCH)
C.C.77/2019
Between
Mr. Sanjay Barrot
S/o.Mr.Radhe Shyam Barrot,
aged about 50 years,
R/o. Devdeep Apts.,
Ground Floor, 44 Tilak Road,
Santacruz(W),
Mumbai -
400 054.
.. Complainant
And
M/s.Aliens Developers (P) Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director and
Joint Managing Director,
Mr. Hari Challa &
Mr.Venkat Prasanna Challa
0/o.Ms.Aliens Space Station,
Tellapur, Ramachandrapuram Mandal,
Medak Dist;
Hyderabad
PIN-502032.
Opposite Party
Counsel for the Complainant
M/s..Appa Rao
Counsel for the Opposite Party
M/s.Raja Sripathi Rao
cORAM: Hon'ble Sri V.V.Seshubabu, Member (J),
And
Hon'ble Smt.R.S.Rajeshree, Member (NJ).
WEDNESDAY, THE
SEVENTH
DAY OF DECEMBER,
TWO THOUSAND TWENTY TWO.
Oral Order:
1. The complaint is filed u/s. 17(1)(a)() of he Consumer
Protection Act, 1986
& 2002 for directions to the opposite
party as under:
i.
to
complete the schedule flat as per
agreed specifications and deliver the
possession of the same forthwith at the
same cost as agreed in the agreement;
ii.
to pay fair rent
of Rs.10 per sq.ft
of
super built up area
per month w.e.f.
31.12.2009
to till handover of flat;
iii.
to pay Rs.8,00,000/- as compensation
for causing mental agony, suffering
&
escalation of construction cost; and
iv.
to pay Rs.50,000/- as legal expenses.
2. The brief averments of the complaint are that the opposite
party
is a private
limited company doing business in the
construction of flats etc. and it had undertaken a Development
Agreement cum GPA
with respective
land owners
for the
to raise
development of land admeasuring Ac.19.26 guntas
residential complexes
covered by Survey nos.384, 385 and
426/A
at Tellapur Village
in Ramachandrapuram Mandal,
Medak
Dist.;
that
the
complainant has undertaken
Construction Agreement dt.17.2.2009 with the opposite party
to purchase a flat bearing no. 1126 in Station - 5 on 11th floor of
the complex by name MsAliens Space Station -1
with super
built up area of 1122
sq.ft.
with one covered car parking
besides undivided share of land of 24.12 sq.yards out of the
land
as stated supra
in total for a sale
consideration of
Rs.13,00,000/; that
the complainant paid Rs.13,00,000/- as
against the total sale consideration;
that the opposite party
executed
a registered sale deed
vide document no.2775 of
2009 dt.18.2.2009 followed
by
Construction
Agreement
dt.18.2.2009, but failed to complete the
construction
as
stipulated; that the opposite party never informed the stages of
construction and not delivered possession of the flat; that the
complainant got issued
a legal notice
dt. 23.3.2019 on the
opposite party at the
available address
but there was no
response from them; that
even though
the opposite party
obtained Building Permission from the HUDA on 11.4.2008, not
completed
the construction
on timne; hence, the complaint
seeking the reliefs as stated supra.
03).
Opposite party filed written version and brief averments
of the same relevant to the facts are that, there is no deficiency in
service;
that the allegations made in the complaint are denied
except those that are admitted; that the complainant has not
approached the Commission with clean hands and
never he
asked for refund of money or for cancellation of the agreement, as
AlcoRSel
such cannot claim deficiency in service;
that the complainant
entered into
an agreement on 18.2.2009
and as per the
agreement opp.parties are alleged to hand over the possession or
or before February,2011 with a grace period of 6 months and
hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed as it is not filed
Within the period of limitation as prescribe under C.P. Act; that
there is a Clause in the Agreement to go for Arbitration in case of
disputes, but it was not opted for; that the complainant not paid
the entire instalments as stipulated under the A
