w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Venkata Anantaraman Nanduri v/s SBC Infra Projects India Pvt., Ltd. & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- V S A INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400TG2011PTC074588

Company & Directors' Information:- K N INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200TG2008PTC058128

Company & Directors' Information:- B L INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400DL2014PTC266491

Company & Directors' Information:- K. C. INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45209NL1990PTC003414

Company & Directors' Information:- K K INFRA PROJECTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200TG2007PTC056630

Company & Directors' Information:- A E INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH2009PTC196191

Company & Directors' Information:- S R R INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45209TG2008PLC058571

Company & Directors' Information:- N R R INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70200TG2010PTC067299

Company & Directors' Information:- K AND G INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U45200KL2010PTC027108

Company & Directors' Information:- SBC INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70109DL1996PLC078079

Company & Directors' Information:- THE INDIA COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999TN1919PTC000911

Company & Directors' Information:- R Y INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U45400TG2013PTC091764

Company & Directors' Information:- K C R INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200TG2009PTC064374

Company & Directors' Information:- M. D. INFRA - PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400MH2009PTC193074

Company & Directors' Information:- V G INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45209TG2011PTC074184

Company & Directors' Information:- J S V INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70200TN2010PTC078632

Company & Directors' Information:- S. G. INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400DL2009PTC192400

Company & Directors' Information:- D & G INFRA AND PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45203PN2009PTC133571

Company & Directors' Information:- G INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400TG2015PLC102010

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65990MH1941PTC003461

Company & Directors' Information:- D. K. INFRA PROJECTS (INDIA) LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400WB2011PLC170421

Company & Directors' Information:- J S INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400WB2011PTC163788

Company & Directors' Information:- B S INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400WB2010PTC151174

Company & Directors' Information:- M R INFRA & PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45209TG2011PTC074858

Company & Directors' Information:- G-9 INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202MP2021PTC054704

Company & Directors' Information:- S V V INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200TG2009PTC065498

Company & Directors' Information:- K M M INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45209TG2013PTC088878

Company & Directors' Information:- A R INFRA PROJECTS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400DL2010PLC198594

Company & Directors' Information:- N-INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200TG2008PTC057620

Company & Directors' Information:- M. M. INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70109WB2011PTC165005

Company & Directors' Information:- D R R INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200TG2007PTC055772

Company & Directors' Information:- R V INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400WB2011PTC158257

Company & Directors' Information:- U M T INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400MH2013PTC244469

Company & Directors' Information:- SBC INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70102TG2007PTC055733

Company & Directors' Information:- R K B INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400WB2009PTC132587

Company & Directors' Information:- A H V INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999WB2012PTC180309

Company & Directors' Information:- G. S. INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400DL2008PTC174931

Company & Directors' Information:- P B S INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70102TG2008PTC060836

Company & Directors' Information:- R M INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400MH2011PTC224655

Company & Directors' Information:- M C W INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74120MH2013PTC244153

Company & Directors' Information:- S. A. INFRA PROJECTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400TG2015PTC099812

Company & Directors' Information:- C Z INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45400TG2016PTC103916

Company & Directors' Information:- P AND C INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45200TN2014PTC096607

Company & Directors' Information:- U K PROJECTS AND INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200TN2015PTC102111

Company & Directors' Information:- M N C INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200TG2008PTC058369

Company & Directors' Information:- K V P INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45209TG2011PTC073318

Company & Directors' Information:- L K D INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45209TG2013PTC085748

Company & Directors' Information:- B R S INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201DL2013PTC248023

Company & Directors' Information:- D V INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200AP2014PTC095005

Company & Directors' Information:- N V R INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70100AP2015PTC097985

Company & Directors' Information:- D. B. INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45201GJ2010PTC059696

Company & Directors' Information:- R A INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29309RJ2021PTC075070

Company & Directors' Information:- V J INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45500AP2021PTC118892

    Complaint Case No. 25 of 2013

    Decided On, 01 March 2017

    At, Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA
    By, PRESIDENT & THE HONOURABLE MR. PATIL VITHAL RAO
    By, JUDICIAL MEMBER

    For the Complainant: In person. For the Opposite Parties: M/s. S.S.R. Murthy, P.V. Satyanarayana, Advocates.



Judgment Text

Oral Order: (B.N. Rao Nalla, President)

The complaint is filed under section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the Complainant complaining deficiency in service against the Opposite parties praying to direct the Opposite parties to (a) immediately carry-out all pending works for Flat No.304, Block-1, 3rd floor; (b) on completion, come-forth and register the flat No.304, Block-1, 3rd floor in favour of the Complainant and handover registration document to SBI bank for home loan transfer and mortgage; (c) to pay interest on Rs.29,05,154/- paid to the Builder, for causing abnormal delay @ 18% p.a. (since last four years); (d) to grant consolidated damages, travel costs, loss of house rent, mental agony and expenses of Rs.7,50,000/-; (e) costs of the complaint and also award any other reliefs.

2. It is the case of complainant that on the advise of his friend, approached the OP No.1 on 28.07.2008 and inspected the project, met OP No.2 for purchase of flat No.408 in Block-4, 4th floor (west facing) consisting of 1611 sft as it was the only available flat by then and paid booking amount of Rs.50,000/- and further paid Rs.2,50,000/- as against the sale consideration of Rs.34,16,350/-. The developer entered into an agreement of sale and thereby approached the bank for loan by paying the processing fee of Rs.5,000/-, who agreed to provide 85% of the sale consideration amount as loan while the balance to be borne by the Complainant.3. The Complainant signed required papers and also entered into a Tripartite Agreement with the bank and developer to avail the loan of Rs.29,15,000/- being sanctioned on 05.11.2008 and the EMI would start on 01.01.2009. The OP No.3 made first disbursement to the OP No.1 on 07.12.2008 in a sum of Rs.7,85,600/- by way of credit to account number 30028695566. The personal enquiries of Complainant revealed that many buyers cancelled their bookings resulting several east facing flats became available. As the EMI has not yet commenced, complainant requested the OP No.2 to allot another flat bearing No.304 in Block-1, east facing consisting of 1649 sft to which the Ops 1 and 2 agreed, which was informed to the bank.

4. However, the bank sought for new agreement of sale, which was given by OP No.1 on 29.12.2010 for re-processing home loan. During the interregnum, the Ops 1 and 2 received another disbursement from the bank in a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- on 09.06.2009 and this was acknowledged by Ops 1 and 2 towards new flat. As the loan approvals took nearly two months, the bank insisted for immediate flat registration and handover of documents. In spite of pursuing with the developer to register the flat, they have been postponing the same on one or other pretext. The complainant has been paying EMI of Rs.31,211/- p.m. regularly from January 2009 onwards till date in addition to losing rent of Rs.15,000/- on the flat.5. Complainant came to know that flat No.408 in Block-4 for which he is paying EMIs was originally allotted to him was registered in favour of third person by the developer which they failed to inform. Whereas, the bank would consider sanction of home loan after registration of flat No.304 in Block-1. Hence, he sent a notice to the developer on 05.01.2012 to immediately register the flat in his favour. Despite of the same, the Ops failed to register. When he visited the project site, he was shocked to see that there were many works to be attended viz., main and internal doors, kitchen, electricals, plumbing works, toilets and accessories, flooring, plastering and paintings. In addition to it, there is change in provisions to that of the agreed one. Hence the complaint.

6. Ops 1 and 2 filed written version contending that the complaint is neither maintainable in law nor on facts and hence liable to be dismissed. The complainant approached the Commission with unclean hands. They admitted the booking of flat and receiving of amount but denied about sanction of loan by the bank. It admitted receipt of Rs.3,00,000/- from Complainant and the sum of Rs.7,80,000/- from the bank and also admitted re-allotting of flat No.304 in Block-1 to the complainant. It also admitted about execution of new agreement and receipt of Rs.6,00,000/- on 09.06.2009.7. As the complainant failed to make payment of agreed amount till date, the registration could not be completed. They are ready to perform their part of obligation. All the works stated in the complaint have been already completed in all aspects and there is no deficiency in service on their part. They did not receive any notice as claimed by the complainant. Hence, prayed to dismiss the complaint.

8. OP No.3 filed its written version contending that the complaint is not maintainable against them and that it is made as a proforma party. On the request of Complainant, it sanctioned the loan of Rs.29,15,000/- on execution of proper documents and it disbursed the amount of Rs.7,85,600/- towards 1st disbursement and Rs.6,00,000/- towards 2nd disbursement. The complainant and the Ops 1 and 2 agreed to deposit the title deeds in its favour but the Ops are delaying the registration and deposit of title deeds on one or other pretext. There is no fault on their part and the developer is bound to execute the sale deed in favour of the complainant and in turn, complainant is bound to deposit the same in their favour. At the request of complainant, the loan amount was disbursed by it. Hence, prayed to dismiss the complaint against it as no claim is sought for by the complainant.

9. On his behalf, the Complainant filed his evidence affidavit and the documents, Exs.A1 to A11. On behalf of the Opposite parties 1 and 2, N.Ajay Babu filed the evidence affidavit. No affidavit is filed on behalf of OP No.3 since it is a formal party.

10. To ascertain the ground reality, Sri M.Durga Prasad is appointed as an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the subject flat and to submit a detailed report as to whether the interior works and amenities are provided. The Advocate Commissioner submitted his report in detail and stated that there is no rain water protection to the lentel top of the window; kitchen window is not provided with safety grill; seepage to the window wall in the hall due to non-providing rain water safety lentels; electricity connection was disconnected due to non-payment of consumption charges; car parking is not allotted due to non-drawal of allotment by the society; swimming pool not functioning due to insufficient water; gymnasium is closed. The complainant filed his objections in detail pointing-out various short-comings and defects yet to be attended by the Opposite parties 1 and 2, which are not in denial.

11. The points that arise for consideration are :

i) Whether the Complainant is a 'consumer' as defined under the Act and whether there is any ‘deficiency in service’ on the part of the Opposite parties 1 and 2 and whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?

ii) To what relief ?

12. POINT No.1: There is no dispute that the Complainant had booked the flat No.408 in Block-4 on the 4th floor of the project launched by the Opposite parties 1 and 2 at the first instance by paying a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and later changed the booking to east facing flat No.304 in Block-1 consisting of 1649 sft. It is also not in dispute that the complainant obtained the home loan from the OP No.3 bank and got disbursed the first and second instalments amounting to Rs.7,85,600/- and Rs.6,00,000/- respectively. It is also not in dispute that the Opposite parties 1 and 2 did not execute the sale deed in favour of the Complainant.13. It is the case of the Complainant that there are many works which are yet to be completed which the Opposite parties 1 and 2 never disputed. To ascertain the correctness of the averments made by the Complainant, an Advocate Commissioner as stated supra was appointed who in turn had filed his report in detail. The Complainant, however not disputed the report but filed objections to the effect that there are several other works which the Advocate Commission failed to take note of. There is no denial from the Opposite parties 1 and 2 to the objections of the complainant, which mean, the same needs to be attended.14. Except making a vague and bald assertion that the entire provisions have been made and that the flat is completed in all aspects, no piece of paper is filed by the Opposite parties 1 and 2. On the other hand, the OP No.3 bank supported the version of the complainant stating that the Opposite parties 1 and 2 are postponing the execution of sale deed and registration on one or the other pretext. OP No.3 bank is ever ready to release the balance amount of sale consideration immediately after execution of sale deed and handing over the same to them.15. It is to be stated that the agreement of sale executed on 29.12.2010 by the Opposite parties 1 and 2 provides for completion of the flat within 12 months, which would conclude on 29.12.2011. Though, more than considerable period of time had elapsed, the Opposite parties 1 and 2 failed to complete the construction in all aspects and deliver the possession of the flat to the Complainant. The present complaint is laid on 03.01.2013 after waiting for considerable time. Altogether the complainant paid an amount of Rs.28,99,554/- as against the total sale consideration of Rs.34,16,450/-, as is evident from the documents Ex.A4 and A5. For the reasons best known, though the Opposite parties 1 and 2 are in receipt of major portion of the sale consideration, have failed to complete the subject flat in all aspects, as agreed to in the brochure Ex.A1.16. From the documents Ex.A6 to A8, it is crystal clear that the complainant had been making demands to the Opposite parties 1 and 2 to complete the subject flat in all respects and to execute the sale deed in his favour. Even to the legal notice got issued by the Complainant, the Opposite parties 1 and 2 failed to comply with. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant initially entered into an agreement of sale for purchase of flat No.408 in block No.4 as long back on 26.08.2008 and shifted his option to flat No.304 in 3rd floor in Block-1 in pursuance of agreement of sale, dated 29.12.2010. As things stood thus, during the interregnum, the Opposite parties 1 and 2 sold away the flat bearing No.408 in block-4 to some third party as is evident from the statement of encumbrance on property, Ex.A10.17. Admittedly, the complainant paid the major part of sale consideration of Rs.28,99,554/- leaving a balance of Rs.5,89,046/-. In spite of the same, the Opposite parties 1 and 2 failed to register the flat in favour of the complainant by way of executing proper sale deed. It is also the case of the OP No.3 that they are ever ready to release the balance amount of loan provided the Ops 1 and 2 executes the sale deed conveying the property in favour of the complainant and deposit the sale deed title deeds with them. Except denying the short-comings pointed-out by the complainant and the objections made to the Commissioner’s report, no evidence is brought on record by the Ops 1 and 2 to show that the subject flat is completed in all aspects. Had really there are no short-comings and had really the flat is completed in all aspects as contended by the Opposite parties 1 and 2, nothing prevented them from filing photographs to disprove the contention/averment of the complainant, which they failed to for the reasons best known. May be, on account of non-completion, they have not chosen to bring any material on record.

18. On the other hand, the Complainant filed photographs along with the objections which shows the deficiencies and short-comings in the subject flat which are not in denial. The time as agreed for completion of the flat in all aspects is expired as long back on 29.12.2011 itself. It is also the case of the complainant that due to non delivering the possession and non-completion of the flat, the complainant losing rent and his dream of owning a house is shattered. No bonafide cause is shown by the Opposite parties 1 and 2 for non-execution of the sale deed, which amounts to sheer negligence and deficiency of service on their part.19. It is the further case of the Opposite parties 1 and 2 that there is no consumer dispute and that the complainant is not a consumer. In this regard, we may state that it would be appropriate for us to refer to the relevant provisions in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to decide the issue. The term 'consumer' and 'service' has been defined in the Consumer Protection Act. Section 2 (1)(d)(ii) defines the term 'consumer' which read as under:

'(d) 'consumer' means any person who-

(i) …………….

(ii) hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who 'hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purposes;

And the term 'service' has been defined underSection 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

(o) "service" means service of any description which is made available to potential users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of facilities in connection with banking, financing insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service;'

From the above, it can be safely stated that the Complainant is a consumer as defined under the Act and he availed/hired the services of the Opposite parties 1 and 2 for a consideration. It has become a practise for the developers to take whatever pleas they intend to take without recoursing to the facts.

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

For the foregoing reasons, we answer the point No.1 framed for consideration at paragraph No.11, supra, in favour of the Complainant and against the Opposite parties.20. POINT No.2 : In the result, we allow the complaint in part and direct the Opposite parties 1 and 2 (a) to complete the construction of the flat bearing No.304 in 3rd floor of Block-1, measuring 1648 sft along with undivided share of land measuring 49.44 square yards (out of 18029 square yards), in 'PRISTINE PLACE' in Sy.No.129, 176, 177 admeasuring Ac.4-19 guntas, situated at Gajularamaram village, Qutbullapur mandal, Ranga Reddy district in all aspects including the short-comings as pointed-out by the Complainant in the objections made to the Advocate Commissioner’s report; (b) on such completion of the work, the Complainant shall pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.5,89,046/- to the Opposite parties 1 and 2 for registering the flat; (c) to execute the sale deed conveying the above stated property in favour of the complainant and to handover the Occupancy Certificate obtained from the competent authority and consequently to handover the sale deed to the Opposite party No.3 bank; (d) Complainant to bear the stamp duty and registration charges for registration of the flat; (e) to reimburse the amount of Rs.10,000/- incurred by the complainant for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner; (f) to pay the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation and costs of Rs.5,000/- to the Complainant; Time for compliance : four weeks.
O R