CRYSTAL PROPERTIES, RAHMANS, JUDGES AVENUE Vs. SIBY MATHEW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Ernakulam in OP No. 479/2004. The appellant 1 & 2 prefers this appeal from the impugned order passed by the Forum below. The 1st respondent is the complainant and 2nd and 3rd respondents are the 3rd and 4th opposite parties in the above OP.

(2.) This appeal prefers under the directions of the Forum below that the opposite party 1 and 2 are directed to comply with Ext. A6 agreement or in the alternative refund Rs.7,35,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint (25-9-04) till realization. The opposite parties shall also to pay Rs. 2,500/- as costs to the complainant.

(3.) This case is originated from the defect of building which the complainant purchased with a plot named as "Villa" (after the construction and hand over the villa) from the opposite parties. The complainant is having a strong case that it was agreed that the construction would be completed with in 8 months and an agreement was executed on 30-8-2002. The construction proceeded at a very slow process and the complainant?s wife used to supervise the construction and the foundation and concrete roof slabs regularly. The complainant repaying the housing loan with interest and has spend approximately Rs.2,00,000/- towards interest till now. The opposite parties have neither done the temporary repairing works promised, nor completed the construction of the new house and even failed to execute the sale deed with regard to the adjacent plot No. 4. Inspite of several reminders there was no progress in the work of the new building and no initiate to execute the deed of transfer of the new site, to the complainant. According to him, the act of the opposite parties amounts to gross negligence and deficiency of service and prays for a direction to the opposite party to complete the construction of the building in plot No. 4 with quality workmanship as per agreement dated 30-8-2002 or in the alternative to refund of Rs.7,35,000/- with 12% interest per annum from the date of complaint till realization, to pay Rs.2,00,000/- towards interest on the housing loan availed for making payment to the opposite party, and to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental and physical agony. The opposite party appeared and denied the allegation of the complainant they contented that the complaint was not maintainable as it is hit by the law of limitation as the building was handed over to the complainant on 26-9-2000. The opposite parties are also not liable to either to refund the sum of Rs.7,35,000/- with interest or to pay any other amount as compensation. There is neither deficiency in service nor any defects in construction nor any promise to hand over the title and possession of any new building to the complainant and the complaint may be dismissed with costs.