Date of filing: 14.06.2017 Date of order : 17.05.2019
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::
KADAPA, Y.S.R DISTRICT
PRESENT SMT. K. SIREESHA, B.L., PRESIDENT (FAC)
SRI N. NIRANJAN BABU, B.A, B.L., MEMBER
Friday, 17th day of May, 2019
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 43 / 2017
Ramireddy Chenna Reddy, S/o R. Chenna Reddy, aged 78 years,
R/at D.No. 1/436.2A, Maruthinagar,
Kadapa city YSR District. …. Complainant.
Vs.
1. M/s JSR Constructions, A partnership Firm Regd. No. 159/2013,
Rep. by its Managing Partner, J. Sivarami Reddy,
D.No. 1/2436, APHB Colony, Kadapa City YSR District.
2. J. Siva Rami Reddy, S/o J. Sankar Reddy, aged about 55 years,
Managing Partner of M/s JSR Constructions, D.No. 1/2436,
APHB Colony, Kadapa City YSR District
3. J. Parvathamma, W/o J. Sivarami Reddy, aged about 55 years,
Partner of M/s JSR Constructions, D.No. 1/2436, APHB Colony,
Kadapa City, YSR District ….. Opposite Parties.
This complaint coming for final hearing on 10.5.2019 in the presence of Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate for complainant and Sri P.V. Ramana Reddy, Advocate for opposite parties 1 to 3 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:
O R D E R
(Per Smt. K. Sireesha, President FAC),
1. The complainants filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short herein after called as C.P. Act) to direct the opposite parties to execute a regular registered sale deed in respect of schedule mentioned flat No. 108 property with car parking facility OR to pay Rs. 16,50,000 which was paid by the complainant towards full consideration of flat along with interest at 24 percent p.a. from the date of agreement of sale till date of realization, within 30 days.
2. The brief facts of the complaint is as follows: Opposite party No. 1 is the registered partnership firm bearing No. 159/2013. O.P.2 is the Managing Director and O.P.3 is a partner of O.P.1. All are responsible for the activities of their business. The complainant entered into agreement of sale of un-divided share of land with semi finished flat bearing No. 108 for sale consideration of Rs. 16, 50,000. The complainant paid total amount to that effect and O.P.2 executed agreement of sale on 04.01.2016 for flat No. 108. As per agreement the complainant have to give possession and registered flat No. 108 by the end of 12 months i.e. 03.1.2017. After completion the complainant made several requests to get possession of flat No. 108 with his expenses, but the opposite parties postponed the same one pretext or other. The same caused mental agony and physical strain to the complainant. The opposite parties services are deficient in nature and there is negligence on the part of the opposite parties in not registering flat No. 108 in favour of the complainant. But the opposite parties registered to 3rd parties with sale deed No. 4015/2017 dt. 24.8.2017. So as per law the complainant is entitled to seek for alternative relief ofreturn of sale consideration of Rs. 16,50,000 from O.Ps.
Schedule A
All that piece and parcel of land bearing Ac. 1.00 cents or 0.405 Hectors or 4840 Sq.yards out of site left for master plan road i.e. or 4627 Sp. Yards in Sy. No. 609 of Mamillapalli Revenue village, Kadapa Municipal Corporaton, Kadapa city is bounded by:
East : site sold by K. Ramagopal Reddy to others.
West : Site belongs to Annaluru Vijayalakshi.
North : B Block.
South : Main Road. Within these total admeasuring 4627 Sp. Yards.
Schedule B
Eroding part of the “A schedule” property herein above and the property sold to the purchase under this and 4627 1/45th undivided un-equivalent share of land in the “A schedule property is equal of 55.69 Sq.yards site, flat No. 108 situated in third floor measuring 1150 Sq.feets including common area along with car parking facility in A Block in “JSR Residency” residential apartments by the first party / vendor located in the lands of Mamillapalli Revenue village as declared in schedule A in Kadapa Municipal Corporation, Kadapa city, to the second party / vendee with all easement right pertaining to the said flat bounded by :
East : Corridor and open to sky.
West : Open to sky.
North : flat No. 107
South : Stair case and Flat No. 109.
There is gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, the complaint.
3. Written version filed on behalf of the opposite parties 1 to 3. All the allegations are false and there is no documentary evidence proof to prove the same. The complainant entered in to an agreement by paying Rs. 16,50,000 to O.P.2 and O.P.2 executed an agreement of sale of un-divided share of land with semi finished flat bearing No. 108 with specific terms and conditions are all false. There is an execution of relinquishment agreement for releasing the rights by the partners of O.P.2 and there is dispute between O.P.2 and other partners. Flat No. 108 was in favouro f one vengal Reddy Joythi by way of registered sale deed document No. 4015/2017. Flat No. 108 was disposed to V. Jyothi, she is possession and enjoyment of the same. There was dispute between O.P.2 and complainant in C.C. Nos. 37/2017, 38/2017, 41/2017, 42/2017 and 44/2017 as per their written version. The complainant did not added V. Jyothi as necessary party to the complaint. There was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and negligence on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, the complaint may be dismissed with costs. The complaint is hit by section 11 of CPC as she already filed the suit in Civil Court against the O.Ps. seeking the same relief. The terms of the agreement must follow by both parties. This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint since there is an agreement to the O.Ps are liable to execute registered sale deed or to follow the agreement binding of terms and conditions of the agreement. In these circumstances the complaint may be dismissed.
4. On behalf of complainant Ex. A1 to A3 were marked and on behalf of the opposite parties Exs. B1 to B9 are marked.
5. From the above averments the following points are settled for determination:
- Whether the complainant is eligible for compensation as prayed by him or not?
- Whether there is negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties or not?
- To what relief ?
6. Point Nos. i and ii The complainant brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Forum to perform the registered sale deed in favour of the complainant by O.Ps. The complaint filed for specific performance. So this is not right Forum to file this case and the complainant is directed to file the case before the court of law for specific performance. As seen from the complaint and written version filed by both parties. It is very clear that Ex. A1 is unregistered agreement of sale in favour of the complainant by the opposite parties. Ex. B1 is a registered sale deed document executed by O.P.2 in favour of V. Jyothi in respect of falt No. 103. As seen from the complaint the complainant had given criminal complaint against O.P.2 on the file of RIMS police station under FIR No. 46/2018 on the same charge sheet was framed by the RIMS police station against O.P.2. Ex. B9 shows clearly shows that the complainant approached Addl. Senior Civil Judge Court, Kadapa and filed in O.S.No. 134/2018 against the opposite parties. As seen from the evidence eon record it is very clear as per Ex. B1 there was registered sale deed executed in favour of V. Jyothi by the opposite parties. Ex. A1 is the un-registered agreement of sale in favor of the complainant. The nature of the complaint needs volume of evidence which is not possible before this Forum. Ex. B2 to B6 are not relevant to the present complaint, these exhibits does not support the case of the complainant. Ex. B7 relates encumbrance on the property. As this complaint is purely in civil nature. This has to be decided before the proper court of law. Ex. B8 is a partnership agreement between the partners and O.P.2 relates to the land but not related to the flats. At the same time there are both criminal and civil cases between both parties i.e complainant and the opposite parties. So this is not right Forum to file the complaint by the complainant. So the complainant is directed to go to Civil Court of law for proper adjudication.
7. Point No.iii In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs. The complainant is directed to approach the proper court of law.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 17th day of May, 2019
MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
Witnesses examined for the Complainant:
Witnesses examined for the Opposite party: NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant :
Ex.A1 Copy of Original Unregistered agreement of sale dt.04.01.2016 of un-divided share of land with semi-finished flat party executed by the opposite party no.2 in the capacity of Managing Partner in favour of the complainant.
Ex.A2 P/Copy of FIR No.46/2018 of RIMS P.S., Kadapa against the O.P.2No.2.
Ex.A3 P/Copy of Charge Sheet of RIMS P.S., Kadapa against the O.P.2
Exhibits marked on behalf of the Opposite parties :
Ex.B1 P/c of Registered sale deed Doc. No.4015 dated 24.8.2017 executed by O.P-1 & 2 in favour of one V. Jyothi, in respect of Flat No.108.
Ex.B2 P/c of Registered sale deed Doc. No.4016 dated 24-08-2017 executed by O.P-1 & 2 in favour of one R.Jaya Prathap Reddy, in respect of Flat No.202.
Ex.B3 Certified copy of Registered sale deed Doc. No.4014 dated 24-08-2017 executed by O.P-1 & 2 in favour of one Jaya Rathnamma, in respect of Flat No.201.
Ex.B4 P/c of Registered sale deed Doc. No.1332 dated 7.4.2017 executed by O.P-1 & 2 in favour of one V.Jyothi, in respect of Flat No.504.
Ex.B5 P/c copy of Certified copy of Registered sale deed Doc. No.4342 dated 22-08-2017 executed by O.P-1 & 2 in favour of one Soma Murali in respect of Flat No.302.
Ex.B6 P/c of un Registered agreement of sale deed executed by O.P-1 & 2 in favour of one Mandla Ram Mohan, in respect of Flat No.303.
Ex.B7 P/c of Statement of encumbrance in respect of Flats of O.Ps firm.
Ex.B8 P/c of Partnership Agreement dated 22-07-2013 executed between O.P No.2 and other partners.
Ex.B9 P/c of plaint in O.S. No.301/2017 on the file of Principal Senior Civil
Judge, Kadapa filed by V.Sankaraiah.
MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
Copy to :
- Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate for complainant.
- Sri P.V. Ramana Reddy, Advocate for opposite parties.
B.V.P.
