Filing Date:-28-01-2009.
Order Date:-30-03-2009.

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, TIRUPATI

Present:- Sri G.V. Raghavulu, President.

Smt. T.Sujatha Devi, Member.

MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

C.C.No.16/2009

Between

Tankasala Veparala Sudarsana Rao,
S/o. T.V. Sreenivasa Rao,
Hindu, aged 48 years,
Door No.10-15-56, Upstairs,
K.K. Layout, Tirupati Urban Mandal,
Chittoor District. … Complainant

And

1. Happy Home Foundations (Tirupati) Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
Having office at Saradha Nagar,
Near Tiruchanoor Bye Pass Road,
Tirupati Urban Mandal, Chittoor District.

2. M. Mohan Reddy,
Managing Director,
Happy Home Pvt. Ltd.,
C/o. City Square Enterprises Private Limited,
312, 3rd Floor, Royal Corner,
K.H. Road, Bangalore. … Opposite parties

This complaint coming on before us for final hearing on 20.03.2009 and upon perusing the complaint, written version and other relevant material papers on record and on hearing Sri. K. Ajeya Kumar, counsel for the complainant and the opposite parties having been called absent and set ex-parte and having stood over till this day for consideration, the Forum made the following:-

ORDER

DELIVERED BY Smt. T. SUJATHA DEVI, MEMBER

ON BEHALF OF THE BENCH

This complaint is filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to register the plot in Vedanthapuram village layout of the opposite parties, i.e., “Temple trees” venture within the time stipulated or alternatively to direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.52,250/- with interest at 24% per annum from 07.06.2002 till the date of the complaint, to pay Rs.3,00,000/- towards damages and also to pay the costs of the complaint.

2. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows :
That the opposite party No.1 is the developer of land by laying plots in Tirupati and other areas. The opposite party No.2 is the person who is the Managing Director of the opposite party No.1. The opposite parties laid plots in Vedhanthapuram Village, Avilala Panchayat, Tirupati and offered the same for sale by several schemes to general public. The complainant joined in one such a scheme (Brindavan) as member bearing Pass Book No.676 of Sri. T.V. Sudarsana Rao on 07.06.1998. From that day onwards, he paid installments regularly and completed the schedule by paying regular monthly installments of Rs.750/- as per the terms and conditions and the receipt of which is entered in the pass book. The complainant cleared the installments as per the agreed terms by the end of 07.06.2002 and registration charges of Rs.5,360/-. Though, the complainant paid all the installments, the opposite party did not register the plots. Whenever the complainant approached the office of the opposite party, they were postponing the same by one reason or the other. The complainant came to know that several other customers also suffering in the hands of the opposite parties having paid the amounts. The non registration of the plots inspite of receipt of the entire installments and also registration charges amounts to high deficiency in service. Even recently, the complainant visited the opposite parties. There is no proper response from the opposite parties. On 11.05.2007 the complainant issued a legal notice to the opposite parties. The notice is acknowledged by the opposite parties, but there is no response for the same. Hence, the complaint.
3.The opposite parties remained ex-parte.
4. On behalf of the complainant Exs.A1 to A3 are marked.
Ex.A1 is the receipts of payment of installments (54Nos) by the complainant to
the opposite party No.1
Ex.A2 is the letter of the complainant to the opposite parties
dated 21.03.2007
Ex.A3 is the office copy of legal notice to the opposite parties, dated 11.05.2007
5. The points for consideration are :
1.Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and if so, to what amount is the complainant entitled to?
2.Whether the complainant is entitled to interest at 24% per annum on the amount due to him?
3.Whether the complainant is entitled to Rs.3,00,000/- towards damages?
4.Whether the complainant is entitled to the costs of the complaint?
5. To what relief?

Point No.1:- The case of the complainant is that the opposite party No.1 is the developer of land by laying plots in Tirupati and other areas. The opposite party No.2 is the person who is the Managing Director of the opposite party No.1. The opposite parties laid plots in Vedhanthapuram Village, Avilala Panchayat, Tirupati and offered the same for sale by several schemes to general public. The complainant joined in one such a scheme (Brindavan) as member bearing Pass Book No.676 of Sri. T.V. Sudarsana Rao on 07.06.1998. From that day onwards he paid installments regularly and completed the schedule by paying regular monthly installments of Rs.750/- as per the terms and conditions and the receipt of which is entered in the pass book. The complainant cleared the installments as per the agreed terms by the end of 07.06.2002 and registration charges of Rs.5,360/-. The complainant has produced Ex.A1 in support of the payments paid by him to the opposite parties. It is seen from Ex.A1 that he paid only Rs.38,250/- towards installments and registrations charges of Rs.4,500/-, totaling to Rs.42,750/-and not as mentioned in the complaint. The opposite parties started the venture without the approval of TUDA. So the acts of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant has not placed any original pass book before this Forum. The complainant relied upon Ex.A1. The payment of amounts mentioned in Ex.A1 by the complainant to the opposite parties are not in dispute. So far as Ex.A1 is concerned, the amount covered under Ex.A1 comes to Rs.42,750/- and not Rs.52,250/-. The opposite parties remained ex-parte. Under these circumstances, the District Forum is of the opinion that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and the complainant is entitled to Rs.42,750/- and not Rs.52,250/- as claimed by the complainant. This point is answered accordingly.

Point No.2:- In view of our finding on Point No.1, we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to interest at 9% per annum on Rs.42,750/- from the date of last payment, i.e., 07.06.2002 till the date of realization. This point in answered accordingly.

Point No.3:- As interest of 9% per annum on Rs.42,750/- is being given from the date of last payment, i.e., 07.06.2002 till the date of realization, we are of the opinion that the complainant is not entitled to any amount for damages. This point is answered accordingly.

Point No.4:- In view of our finding on Point No.1, the District Forum is of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to Rs.1,500/- towards the costs of the complaint. This point is answered accordingly.

Point No.5:- In the result, the complaint of the complainant is allowed in part directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.42,750/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of last payment, i.e., 07.06.2002 till the date of realization and to pay Rs.1,500/- towards the costs of the complaint to the complainant.
Time for compliance is 6 weeks.