BABA CONSTRUCTIONS Vs. P S NEELAKANTAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the builder who is in appeal before us in this batch of six appeals. He is aggrieved by the orders of the State Commission issuing certain directions and yet leaving the parties to seek further reliefs in the Civil Court.

(2.) Appellant was opposite party before the State Commission. Smt. Salike Hemalata as owner of the land and her husband Salike Satya Murthy joined hands to build residential-cum-commercial complex in the land owned by Hemalata. Husband of Hemalata, Salike Satya Murthy became the developer and got irrevocable power of attorney executed by his wife in his favour. Necessary plans were sanctioned from the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority. Two Blocks I and II were to be constructed. Block No. I was to be retained by Hemalata herself and 20 flats out of 22 flats constructed in Block II were agreed to be sold. Complainants-respondents herein are some of the flat owners who entered into agreements both with Hemalata for undivided portion of the land and with Salike Satya Murthy for construction of the flats. Both the agreements were executed simultaneously.

(3.) Complainants filed complaints alleging deficiency in service. It was alleged that the construction was not as per the agreement. It was submitted that M/s. Baba Construction in which name Staya Murthy was constructing the flats and had not given the occupancy certificate. Lift was not installed, flooring of the staircase, lobbies, etc.were not completed, cellar flooring was incomplete, doors were of inferior quality and workmanship of mosaic flooring was of poor quality, plastic/PVC pipe-line provided for waterline was of sub-standard quality, external walls had not been painted with snowcem and the like. It was stated in the complaints that the defects were not rectified in spite of demands and as such complaints were filed. All these were denied by the appellant and it was submitted that full payments towards the agreed price of the flats had not been made.