VITTHALA USHA RANI Vs. VISHAL PROJECTS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a consumer complaint jointly filed by the purchasers, Smt.Vithala Usha rani and her mother, of two houses from a real estate developer, an incorporated company, represented by its Managing Director, Sri G.Sridhar Rao, seeking a direction to it to complete the construction and hand over the possession of the houses bearing no.B14 and B13 by executing the sale deeds in favour of the complainants respectively, to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- as also costs and consequential reliefs.

(2.) The facts of the case as culled out from the complaint are briefly as follows:

(3.) The opposite party is the absolute owner and possessor of land on which he intended to construct independent houses and sell them to aspiring allottees. Accordingly on an offer made by the opposite party, the complainant No.1 and 2 purchased two plots bearing Nos. B14 and B13 respectively with houses planned to be built upon them for consideration of Rs.18,75,000/- each. They claimed to have entered into separate sale agreements in terms thereof under which they claimed to have paid Rs.4,00,000/- each of which Rs.1,00,000/- in cash and Rs.3,00,000/- by way of cheque dated 21-2-2006, though the agreements were dated 12-1-2006 ( may be agreements antedated or cheques post dated?). The complainants also claimed to have paid Rs.6,00,000/- each on 21-2-2006. While things stood thus on 11-4-2006, the opposite party requested the complainant No.2 to pay Rs.14, 75,000/- towards the further instalment of the sale consideration for the two plots. On 22-4-2006 the opposite party made a further demand of Rs.1,42,688/-each comprised of 1% vat 4.21% service tax and Rs.45,000/- approximate registration charges. Finally on 14-10-2006, the opposite party requested the complainant No.2 to pay a further amount of Rs.20,55,000/- towards the balance of amount due to him from out of the consideration agreed upon. The complainant no.1 and complainant No.2 claimed to have issued cheques for Rs.10,00,000/- each on 14-11-2006 and delivered the cheques to the opposite party. However, it was their further case that the complainants were due only a further amount of Rs.1,75,000/- which they promised to pay at the time of registration. It seems the opposite party intentionally abstained from encashing the Rs.10,00,000/- cheques with a motive to sell the houses at higher rates in view of the escalation in prices. The complainants claimed to have made entreaties to the opposite party to encash the cheques while offering to pay the balance amount. But the opposite party went on postponing encashment of the cheques on one pretext or the other. To the utter shock and surprise of the complainants they finally received on 28-6-2007 two cheques of Rs.7,00,000/- each in favour of the complainants with a covering letter revoking the contract and returning the money allegedly paid by the complainants. This recession of the contract according to the complainants marks the deficiency in service and they therefore claimed to have issued legal notice which did not evoke any response from the opposite party. In these circumstances they claimed to have resorted to this remedy before this Commission.