D.O.F:12/02/2018
D.O.O:02/09/2024
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KASARAGOD
CC.29/2018
Dated this, the 02nd day of September 2024
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SMT. BEENA. K.G : MEMBER
A.T. Philip Aliyas Sunny Thomas,
S/o Late. Eppan Thomas
Achanat House
Puthur Village, P.O. Kudlu.
Kasaragod. Pin: 671124. : Complainant
(Adv: Ramakrishana Pervvadi)
And
1. P.O Ahammed,
S/o Pallickal Yousuf Ahammed
Bangodu, Thalangara
Kasaragod – 671122.
2. D. Madhusoodhanan Nair
Engineer, S/o Divakaran Nair,
Mother House, Surabhi Housing Colony,
Nullipady Kasaragod – 67112.
3. Badire Andunhi Sulaiman
S/o Andunhi Haji,
Badire, Sahina Manzil,
Bangod. P.O Thalangara, : Opposite Parties
Kasaragod- 671122.
(Adv: Prakash Ammanaya)
ORDER
SRI. KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
The complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.
The case of the complainant is that he entered in to an agreement with opposite parties for purchase of 3 bed room flat under name Mas view for Rs. 20,00,000/- . The complainant paid Rs. 5 lakh in cash on 25/09/2015 and the balance Rs. 10,00,000/- on 30/01/2015 and Rs. 5,00,000/- after completion of whole work. But Opposite parties not completed the work as agreed in spite of receiving agreed amount in time. The Opposite parties registered the property in the name of complainant after receiving the full amount on 19/04/2016.
At the time of executing the sale deed the opposite parties assured to the complainant that they will complete the unfinished work of the flat within month. The tiles filled in the floors of the rooms were variations. The painting work were poor and not finished. Opposite party used low quality paints. There are major defects in the plumbing work by which the water supply were disorder, due to the usage of law quality pipes as well as unskilled plumbing work, there are leakage of water inside the apartment. No proper arrangements made for flow of dirty water. The flat is not fit for residential purpose.
The entrance of flat is blocked by stair case which not necessary to go to the first floor.
The complainant is deprived of his house to occupy on the account of the negligence and latches. The Opposite parties are highly profit motive. There is gross negligence and deficiency in service from opposite party. The complainant got mental tension inspite of the fact that he has paid full amount to the opposite parties. The complainant is seeking for a direction to Opposite parties to construct the compound wall on three sides and pay Rs. 4, 00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs only) for replacing the wooden frames and doors, and pay Rs. 2,40,000/- being rent and to demolish unnecessary stair case and to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- for compensation for deficiency in service and cost of litigations.
For Opposite parties Adv. C.H Vishnu Bhat filed vakalth and version. The Opposite party admitted that they entered in to an agreement with complainant for sale of three bedroom flat to the complainant. They executed the sale deed on 25/09/2015. In the sale deed, it is clearly stated that the work of the apartment is not completed and after the execution of the sale deed the Opposite parties have no entry to the apartment. So complainant agreed to that he will complete the work of the apartment. The Opposite party denies any kind of manufacturing defect to the flat. The construction of the flat is as per the approved plan and no changes can be made their after. The flat is still in the possession to the complainant. It is locked by the complainant and opposite parties cannot enter in to the flat sold as per the terms of the sale deed. The Opposite parties denies any deficiency in service from their side and not liable to pay any relief in the complaint and prayed to dismiss the complaint.
The complainant filed IA 121/2018 to appoint an expert Commission and Expert commissioner filed report. The complainant filed IA 125/2021 to amend the complaint and it is allowed . Opposite party filed additional version.
The complainant filed chief affidavit and cross examined as Pw1, Pw2 examined as complainant witness. Ext A1 agreement Ext A2 and A3 BT receipt and sale deed as Ext A4, and Ext C1 and C2 are Expert reports. Opposite party filed affidavit and cross examined as Dw1.
Following points arised for considerations in the case:-
- Whether there is any deficiency in service from opposite Parties?
- Whether complainant is entitled for relief sought in ?
- If so for what reliefs?
All points are considered together for convenience:-
The specific case of the complainant is that he purchased a flat as per registered sale deed dated: 19/04/2016.
As per agreement sale consideration in fixed as Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty lakhs only) advance of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakh only) paid as per agreement. Ten lakh payable on 30/11/2016 and balance after completion of all work. The sale deed was executed in the name of complainant directing full right, title and interest therein. The opposite party has no right on the flat sold. In cross examination Pw1 denies the recitals in his own sale deed. He also denies that he purchased unfinished apartment, where as recitals in Ext A4 sale deed shows flat is unfinished. The complainant says he suffered a loss of Rs. 12,00,000/- but not supported by any evidence records/documents. He admits as per sale deed he is in possession of apartment.
It is true that flat owners do not forfeit the right to claim amenities promised by developer by taking possession of apartments. But in this case single flat is purchased for consideration by looking and satisfying about the construction amenities available and obtained delivery by way of separate sale deed and started occupying it and owner of the flat divested off all his rights to buyer there is no further agreement or stipulation for further stipulations. The Ext C1 and C2 filed by expert commission after 3 years of the occupying the flat. The complainant has failed to prove his case regarding deficiency in service. No evidence is available to prove the liability to pay any damages after the sale deed of the flat in the name of complainant.
In the result complaint is dismissed without order as to costs.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- Agreement
A2 &A3 – Receipts
A4- Sale deed
C1 & C2- Expert Commission Report
Witness Examined
Pw1- A.T Philip
Pw2- Joy.P.K
Dw2- Madhusoodanan Nair. D
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
