Bangalore Urban


Muhamad Fizal. - Complainant(s)


M/s Nakshatra Homes - Opp.Party(s)

Venkatesh prasad

18 Aug 2008


Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cauvery Bhavan, 8th Floor, BWSSB Bldg., K. G. Rd., Bangalore-09.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/1436/2008

Muhamad Fizal.


M/s Nakshatra Homes






Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!


Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number


Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.


COMPLAINT FILED: 27.06.2008 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 18th AUGUST 2008 PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT SRI. SYED USMAN RAZVI MEMBER SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER COMPLAINT NO.1436/2008 COMPLAINANT Sri.Muhamad Fizal, Aged 38 years, No.36, 3rd Main, Classic Paradise, Begur Main Raod, Bangalore – 560 068. Advocate – Sri.P.K.Venkatesh Prasad. V/s. OPPOSITE PARTIES 1. M/s.Nakshatra Homes, No.924, St. Bed, 1st main, 4th Block, Koramangala, Bangalore – 560 034. Rep by its Partner Mr.Rishi Ramankutty. 2. Parashurama Welfare Associaion, Repd. by R.Satyanarayana, Civil Contractor, Bannur Main Road, Bhugatahalli Post, Mysore Taluk / District. O R D E R This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to execute the sale deed with respect to the site allotted and pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and for such other relief’s on an allegations of deficiency in service. The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under: Complainant being lured away with the advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP’s became the member of the OP schemes and association and opted to purchase the site in their project floated at Mysore. Complainant paid an advance of Rs.50,000/- on 08.04.2006. OP.2 promised to allot a site No.224 / 225 measuring East to West – 30’ and North to South – 40’ in their layout Bugathahalli at Mysore. On 30.06.2006 OP.2 executed the sale agreement and received Rs.2,00,000/- by cash. Though complainant has paid the half of the sale consideration OP failed to register a site in his favour in spite of repeated requests and demands made by him. Complainant is ready to pay the remaining sital value as and when called upon by the OP. With all that for no fault of his he was made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. Though complainant invested his hard earned money to purchase the said site he is unable to reap the fruits of his investment. His repeated requests and demands made to OP to execute the sale deed and put him possession of the site went in futile. Thus he felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the reliefs accordingly. 2. On admission and registration of the complaint, notices were sent to the OP’s. OP.1 is served by dropping the information. Service is held sufficient. Notice sent to OP.2 to the admitted address not returned even after 30 days. Hence service is held sufficient U/s.28 A of the C.P Act. As both the OP’s remained absent without any sufficient reason or cause. Hence they are placed Ex-parte. 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP didn’t participate in the proceedings. Then the arguments were heard. 4. It is the case of the complainant that he being lured away with the propaganda and advertisement issued by the OP’s who are engaged in formation of residential layout consisting of sites of various dimensions thought of purchasing a site in the layout formed by the OP.2 at Bugathahalli in Mysore. OP.1 & 2 accepted his membership and received Rs.50,000/- in advance and allotted him a site No.224 / 225 measuring 30’ x 40’. OP.2 entered into a sale agreement on 30.06.2006 and received Rs.2,00,000/-. Booking form receipt, sale agreement copies are produced. 5. Thereafter though complainant was ready and ever ready to pay the remaining cost of the said site OP’s failed to perform their part of contract. Thus complainant felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The evidence of the complainant finds full corroboration with the contents of the undisputed documents referred to above. The non participation of the OP even after the service of the notice leads us to draw an inference that OP admits the allegations made by the complainant. Though complainant invested his hard earned money of Rs.2,50,000/- to purchase a site measuring 30’ x 40’ at Mysore in the year 2006 he is unable to reap the fruits of his investment. Naturally complainant must have suffered both mental agony and financial loss. 6. The booking form discloses the cost of the said site will be about Rs.4,00,000/- apart from other registration and miscellaneous charges. Though complainant is ready to pay the remaining amount, OP has not responded. We are satisfied that complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. There is nothing to discard the sworn testimony of the complainant. Under such circumstance he is entitled for the relief claimed. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: O R D E R The complaint is allowed in part. OP.1 & 2 jointly and severally directed to execute the sale deed with respect to schedule site 224 / 225 allotted to the complainant by receiving the remaining sital value and by collecting the necessary stamp duty, registration and other miscellaneous charges from the complainant and put him in possession of the said site. This order is to be complied within 8 weeks from the date of its communication. In view of the nature of dispute no order as to costs. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 18th day of August 2008.) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT