DUNDOO ARUNA KUMARI Vs. Y. NAGA SATISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present First Appeal has been filed under Sec. 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the Order dtd. 5/7/2021 passed by the learned Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred as 'the State Commission'), in Consumer Complaint No.16 of 2021 filed by the Appellants/ Complainants wherein the State Commission rejected the Complaint.

(2.) As per report of the Registry, there is a delay of 31 days in filing the present Appeal on 5/7/2021. With due regard to the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 in re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation the present Appeal is filed within limitation.

(3.) Brief facts of the case as per the Complainant are that, on 12/7/2005 Respondents No.3 and 4 along with their father Late Sri D. Vijaya Kumar executed a Development Agreement (DA) cum General Power of Attorney (GPA) with the Respondents No.1 and 2/Opposite Parties (OP) to develop the property of the Complainants' bearing H. No 3-1-7/1 (part), 3-1-8 and 3-1-9 admeasuring 1250 Sq Yds on Sarojini Devi Road Secunderabad. In pursuance of said the DA Cum GPA dtd. 12/7/2005 was registered vide Document No.1873/2005 at SRO Secunderabad for construction of a commercial complex. As per the terms and conditions of the said DA cum GPA, both the parties agreed to share the developed property, both commercial and residential in the ratio of 65% to the owners i.e. the Complainants and 35% to the Developers, the Opposite Parties, with equal advantages and disadvantages, including the common areas, that were to be shared commonly. The OPs obtained the sanctioned Plan from the G.H.M.C on 16/10/2007 vide permit No. 125/88. In the meantime, Late Shri Dundoo Vijaya Kumar, (referred as first party of the First Part in the DA Cum GPA dtd. 12/7/2005), father of Respondents No. 3 and 4 and husband of the Appellant/Complainant No.1, expired on 28/10/2007 leaving behind his legal heirs i.e. Appellant and Respondents No. 3 and 4.