BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::
KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT
PRESENT SRI V.C. GUNNAIAH, B.Com., M.L., PRESIDENT
SMT. K. SIREESHA, B.L., LADY MEMBER
SRI M.V.R. SHARMA, MEMBER
Thursday, 01st October 2015
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 45/ 2015
Bodi Reddy Ramprasad Reddy, S/o Narasimha Reddy,
age 38 years, Hindu, Business, Resident of Anumpalli,
H/o Sibyala Village, Rayachoty Mandal, YSR District. ….. Complainant.
Vs.
1. The State Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its
Principal Secretary to Govt. Housing Department,
A.P. Secretariat Buildings, L Block, Room No. 113,
Hyderabad – 01.
2. The Managing Director, A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Corporation Ltd.,
7th Floor, Gagan Vihar Apartments, M.J. Road, Nampally,
Hyderabad, Pin – 500 001.
3. The General Manager, A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Corporation Ltd.,
D.No. 6/700-1, Bharath Scouts & Guides, Sankarapuram,
YSR Kadapa, Pin – 516 001. ….. opposite parties / Respondents.
This complaint coming for final hearing on 21-9-2015 in the presence of complainant in person and opposite parties / respondents also appeared in person and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per V.C. Gunnaiah, President),
1. The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 (for short herein after called as C.P. Act) praying this forum to direct the respondents to refund an amount of Rs. 1,53,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. and also pay Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs. 2,000/- towards court expenses.
2. The averments of the complaint in brevity are that the Government of Andhra Pradesh has launched a scheme for allotment of house and house plots in phase – II at Aananda Nilaya Township in Rayachoty by A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Corporation Ltd., represented by O.P.1 through opposite parties 2 & 3. The complainant applied for allotment of house sites by paying Rs. 3,250/- towards application and registration fee and also paid Rs. 1,50,000/- four times in different dates. Thus he has paid total Rs. 1,53,250/-. The house site is measuring 52 X 28 feet in S. Nos. 1302, 1303, 1304 & 1305. But the opposite parties after receiving the amount had not taken steps to construct the house in phase – II inspite of several oral demands, in the place allotted to him or returned money paid by him. The complainant vexed with the attitude of corporation. The opposite parties failed to perform their part of contract though he was ready willing to perform his part of contract and they failed to return the amount paid by him with interest at 12% p.a. In spite of Govt. issued G.O.Ms. No. 11 (HB-1), Housing department, dt. 22-6-2013. Therefore, the complainant filed this complaint for refund of his amount of Rs. 1,53,250/- from the opposite parties with interest at 12% p.a. and for the above other reliefs.
3. The respondents / opposite parties 1 to 3 filed common counter denying the averments of the complaint regarding the complainant ready for payment of the amounts etc., but they admitted that the complainant has paid registration fee of Rs. 3,000/- along with application cost of Rs. 250/- and also paid Rs. 1,50,000/- towards allotment of classic house on 2-11-2010. But the complainant failed to pay the balance due amount in spite of demands. The complainant not responded for payment of balance amount. As there was no vacant house to allot to the applicant house was not allotted. The complainant defaulted in payment of installments as per the schedule. Hence, the scheme is badly delayed and stopped as the corporation incurred huge amount for drainage main pipelines, septic tank sump, pump rooms etc., Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination.
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties / respondents?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for refund of Rs. 1,53,250/- with interest as prayed by the complainant?
- To what relief?
5. No oral evidence has been let in by the parties. But on behalf of the complainant Exs. A1 & A2 documents are marked. No documents are marked on behalf of the opposite parties / respondents.
6. Heard arguments on both side and considered written arguments filed by the complainant.
7. Point Nos. 1 & 2. It is contended by the complainant that he paid registration fee and application fee of Rs. 3,250/- and the same was accepted by the opposite parties and also received Rs. 1,50,000/- paid by him towards allotment of classic house without objection but they failed to construct house and allot to him or refund the amount paid by him in spite of demands. Therefore, there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties either to allot house or to refund the amount paid by him with interest at 12% p.a. as per G.O.Ms No. 11 (HB-1), Housing department, dt. 22-6-2013. Therefore, the complainant is entitled for all the reliefs claimed.
8. Per contra it is contended on behalf of opposite parties that the complainant failed to pay the balance amount as per schedule and committed default in payment of installments. Therefore, the house could not be constructed and corporation sustained huge loss. Hence, no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties / respondents and the complainant is not entitled for the reliefs. It is admitted by the opposite parties that the complainant has paid Rs. 1,50,000/- towards installment of allotment of house on 2-11-2010 and also paid Rs. 3,000/- towards registration fee and Rs. 250/- towards application fee. Though the opposite parties says that the complainant committed default in paying installments as per schedule on demand. But there is no iota of evidence placed by the opposite parties to prove that any time the opposite parties demanded to pay the balance amount of installments by issuing notice. The opposite parties also not placed any record to show that the classic house work was started in the place allotted to the complainant and work was in progress and demanded installments for the construction of progress of work. On the other hand it is the case of complainant that the opposite parties have not taken up construction of house to allot him and not shown any interest in progressing of the work and in spite of demands by him, they failed to refund the amount. the other cases also filed against the opposite parties they refunded the amount in some cases, as they failed to take up the scheme of construction of house and allot the same to the applicants. In this case also there is no evidence placed by the opposite parties that the work was in progress for allotment of classic house to the complainant and complainant failed to pay the installments amount as demanded by them. The opposite parties themselves stated in their counter that scheme could not be implemented as there was heavy loss to the corporation due to heavy expenditure for drainage, pipelines, septic tanks, sumps and pump rooms etc., and some of the customers withdrawn in middle of the scheme. The above pleadings the opposite parties is clear that the opposite parties failed to continue the scheme to take up the construction work of classic house and allot the some of the applicants including the complainant herein.
9. A perusal of Ex. A2 G.O.Ms No. 11 (HB-1), Housing department, dt. 22-6-2013 clearly goes to show that all the registered applicants may be allowed to migrate to other projects in category – 1 & II or be refunded full payment with 12% interest as recommended. Thus G.O. has also not been followed by the opposite parties either to allot a constructed house in Phase-II or to refund the amount of complainant with interest at 12% p.a. After going through the entire material placed on record and considering the pleas put forth by the parties and their arguments, we hold there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties for not refunding the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- paid by the complainant on demand by him for not allotting the classic house, as such the complainant is entitled for refund of amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from 2-11-2010. However, the complainant is not entitled for return of registration and application fee of Rs. 3,250/-. Accordingly points 1 & 2 are answered in favour of the complainant.
10. Point No. 3. In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to refund Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) to the complainant with interest at 12% p.a. from 2-11-2010 till realization and shall also pay Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards mental agony and Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs of the complaint to the complainant. The opposite parties shall pay the above amounts within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 1st October 2015
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant: NIL For Respondent : NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant : -
Ex. A1 P/c of application data sheet.
Ex. A2 P/c of G.O.Ms. No. 11, dt. 22-6-2013.
Exhibits marked on behalf of the Respondents : - NIL
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to :-
1) Bodi Reddy Ramprasad Reddy, S/o Narasimha Reddy,
age 38 years, Hindu, Business, Resident of Anumpalli,
H/o Sibyala Village, Rayachoty Mandal, YSR District
2) The State Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its
Principal Secretary to Govt. Housing Department,
A.P. Secretariat Buildings, L Block, Room No. 113,
Hyderabad – 01.
3) The Managing Director, A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Corporation
Ltd., 7th Floor, Gagan Vihar Apartments, M.J. Road,
Nampally, Hyderabad, Pin – 500 001.
4) The General Manager, A.P. Rajiv Swagruha Corporation
Ltd., D.No. 6/700-1, Bharath Scouts & Guides,
Sankarapuram, YSR Kadapa, Pin – 516 001.
B.V.P.
