ORDER

1.       Heard Mr. V.T. Sampath Kumaran, (the complainant, In Person) and Mr. Sanjoy Kumar Ghosh, Advocate, for the opposite party. 

2.       V.T. Sampath Kumaran has filed above complaint for directing opposite party to pay (i) INR 300000/- towards repair and rectification costs; (ii) INR 250000/- as litigation costs; (iii) INR 500000/- to National Consumer Welfare Fund, as compensation for mental agony and harassment of the complainant; and (iv) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the facts of the case.

3.       The complainant stated that M/s. Brigade Enterprises Limited (the OP) was a company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of development and construction of group housing projects. The OP launched a high-end project of residential villas in the name of “Brigade Palmgrove”, at Village Bogadi, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, in the year, 2018 and made wide publicity of its amenities and facilities. The complainant booked Villa No. 16 in “Brigade Palmgrove” and paid Rs.1734474/- on 07.03.2018, Rs.171000/- on 09.03.2018, Rs.1905280/- on 07.04.2018 and Rs.16395801/- on 17.04.2018, total Rs.19054740/- for the villa and Rs.1151815/- for common amenities and facilities, additional expenses, property assessment, club membership, maintenance and corpus fund. The OP handed over possession of the villa on 22.04.2018 and executed registered sale deed dated 23.05.2018 of it in favour of the complainant, for which, Rs.190550/- as stamp duty and Rs.25000/- as registration charges and legal expenses was paid. Right from the day of taking possession of the villa on 22.04.2018, the complainant noticed several defects in construction quality and brought to the notice of the Estate Manager, Supervisor, Executive and Engineer of the OP through email messages, telephonic conversations and directly. The complainant first noticed the problem of defective mounting of washbasins and gradually over a period of time he became aware of the fact that the issue was more serious due to inferior materials used for supporting the washbasin and/or poor workmanship. The complainant brought to the notice of the OP on 03.05.2018, reporting ‘leakage under the sink in the ground floor bathroom. The defects can be classified as  pertaining to flooring, polishing of marble floors, water seepage, electrical fittings, washbasin mounting, paint peeling, plumbing & sanitary etc. The OP rectified minor defects, which have been acknowledged time to time in writing. The problem manifested in various rooms, as the root cause of the problem was not addressed by the OP. Nearly 100 messages were exchanged between the parties in making requests again and again for rectification of the defects. In roof, only temporary fixes have been done. Few important defects surfaced within few days of rectification and persist even today. The OP did not rectify major defects in spite of repeated request. In the meantime, Covid-19 spread in the country and lock down was imposed. When lock down was withdrawn, then the OP took plea that their defect liability period had expired and declined to rectify the defects. On 04.09.2021, granite pieces of washbasin fell down. At that time, it was being used but fortunately, it did not cause injury. In spite of information in this respect, the OP refused to rectify it. Then, the complainant filed CC/70/2022 on 23.02.2022 before District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore. The OP raised the issue of lack of pecuniary jurisdiction. District Commission, vide order dated 18.10.2022, held that as ‘consideration paid’ in the present case exceeds Rs.50/- lacs as such it had no pecuniary jurisdiction and returned the complaint for presentation before appropriate forum. Then, this complaint was filed through e-filing on 05.12.2022 and physical copy on 05.01.2023. Some defects were dangerous to the safety of the building. Seepage was not attended for a long time, in spite of complaint in this resp