B NARSIMHA Vs. SYED MAHBOOB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the developers and they should be held responsible for defective construction and to pay for the said deficiency in service. On perusal of the document at Exhibit A2, it is seen that the petitioner and the complainant/respondent No. 1 have signed the Sale Deed and the petitioner took entire responsibility of construction and amenities solely in the agreement. On the basis of the expenditure incurred by the complainant, which was estimated by an Arhitect and an Engineer, which amounts to Rs. 90,759; and also on the findings of the Advocate Commissioner who was directed by the District Forum to inspect the flat; the State Commission confirmed the order passed by the District Forum awarding compensation of Rs. 75,000 along with costs of Rs. 1,000. The State Commission further directed the respondent No. 1/complainant to pay Rs. 3,000 to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as costs, which also does not suffer from any infirmity.

(2.) THERE is no reason for us to interfere with a well reasoned order passed by the State Commission. Hence, this revision petition is dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.