State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Residents Welfare Association ... vs Vice Chairman And Housing Commissioner ... on 11 February, 2009
BEFORE THE A BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: HYDERABAD. C.D.No. 3 OF 2008 Between: Residents Welfare Association, Regd. No.1631/1007 Sanskruti Township, Hyderabad-500 008 Represented by its General Secretary Sri M.Raghava Rao. ..Complainant And Vice Chairman and Housing Commissioner Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Gruhakalpa, M.J.Road, Hyderabad-500 001. Opposite party For the Complainant: Mr.M.Raghava Rao, Party in person Counsel for the Opposite party: Mr.J.Prabhakar. QUORUM:THE HONBLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT AND SMT.M.SHREESHA, MEMBER.
WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND NINE Oral Order:(Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Honble Member) *** The complainant is Residents Welfare Association, represented by its General Secretary and opposite party is Andhra Pradesh Housing Board, a statutory body constituted under Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Act, 1956. Opposite party to meet the growing demand for residential accommodation gave advertisements in different news papers and issued brochures in the year 2003 about Singapore Class Integrated Township Phase I, 4 types, 2080 flats at Pocharam.
The Township has been renamed as Sanskruti Township with design, construction and architectural services by M/s.CESMA INTERNATIONAL during the year 2005. The complainant submitted that they were given to understand that the township will be having modern facilities as mentioned in the Newspapers Ads and brochures and the construction will be as per International Standard and the flats will be delivered in 24 months i.e. before 11-3-2005. The complainant submitted that APHB has collaborated with Cesma International, a wholly owned subsidiary of Singapore Housing and Development Board to develop a self contained township in line with clean, green progressive township of Singapore Quality living with the provision of advanced infrastructure and well distributed facilities. Sanskruti Township at Pocharam, Hyderabad was only 8 kilometers away from Uppal, Hyderabad with landscaped gardens, club house, adjoining IT park, come Home to Rediscover Life. Block Type A-MIG 704 flats, HIG 704 flats, B High 192 Flats, C HIG 320 flats, PH 40 flats, D Duplex 120 flats Total 64 blocks, 2080 Flats. In this Township-in the park you have about 74% open space and only 26% ground coverage and all apartment units are independent with ample ventilation and no common walls. Special care has been taken to create landscaped pockets in between blocks that will not be disturbed by vehicular traffic with the following facilities:
1.
This project is the first of its kind in the country
2. World renowned CESMA International, Singapore has not only designed the township but also taken up its execution
3. The project is being executed on fast track for completion in 18 months
4. Designed as per vaasthu
5. An integrated township with all modern facilities like swimming pool, club house, sewerage treatment plant, school and commercial centre
6. Construction with high quality specifications
7. 10 passenger automatic door lift for each block comprising of 32 units
8. Lights and fans in common areas
9. Fully underground water, electrical water supply an sewerage lines.
10. Secondary roof over terrace for heat insulation
11. Environment friendly sewerage treatment point
12. Room with attached toilet in stilt floor of each block for common use.
The complainant submitted that as per terms and conditions, the allotment will be made by draw of lots after full payment.
i) Maintenance and upkeep of common areas, facilities etc. the residents shall form a Residents Society
ii) Maintenance and upkeep of common areas and structures therein along with facilities to be provided to the allottees shall be undertaken initially by the Board for a maximum period of two years.
iii) One time fixed maintenance corpus find shall be payable to the Board at the time of possession and on formation of the Residents society, balances, if any of maintenance corpus fund shall be transferred to the society.
The complainant submitted that possession shall be given after full payment of the cost along with all other dues, charges, fees, one time maintenance amount, maintenance corpus fund etc. and after execution of sale deed. Specifications given in the brochure are as follows:
Foundation & Structures:
R.C.C. Framed structure Walls: Luppam finish for all inside walls & sponge finish for all external Walls Doors: Custom designed shutters for main door. Commercial flush Shutters for inside doors.
Windows: Glazed aluminum powder coated windows with safety grills Flooring: Good quality ceramic tiles Toilets:Anti Skid Ceramic tiles with ceramic tile dadooing upto 2.1 M Height & sanitary fixtures Kitchen: Polished green marble, stainless steel sink & wall dadooing Painting: Inside coloring with two coats of plastic emulsion, External Walls with cement based paint and Joinery with enamel painting Electrical: Concealed wiring with adequate points for T.V. telephone, Power points & provision for geyser in toilets.
Lift: Ten passenger automatic door lift for each block Fire Fighting: Provision for fire fighting equipment at appropriate places and requisite norms.
Security System: Security posts at suitable locations.
The complainant submitted that having been attracted by the technical specifications and price of 4 types of 2080 flats and modern facilities promised by opposite party through advertisements and brochures, members of the Complainant Association with good faith on opposite party pooled all their resources and purchased the flats in the Township. When the flats were allotted, the allottees paid the consideration as per terms agreed upon and took delivery of flats. After taking delivery, they found that the promises mentioned in the brochures and advertisements in the news paper in the year 2003 published by A.P. Housing Board has not been fulfilled. They started living in the flats from June 2005 and many construction defects have come to light during the past two and half years due to which the maintenance became very big problem. The poor standard is on account of use of substandard materials, bad workmanship, lack of proper water curing at the time of construction, defective design and construction, poor or total lack of supervision, designing defects are very noticeable in the bath rooms, kitchen, service area water, sewerage lines, ducts, internal roads. For example there is no anti-skid flooring in the bath rooms, P.V.C. Main water pipe lines are leaking within the walls and ducts etc. creating electrical short circuit and health hazards problems.
The Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly appointed a House Committee in the year 2006. The members of the House committee visited the township along with Vice Chairman and engineers of A.P.Housing Board on 8-11-2006, 300 residents represented to the committee and brought to their notice the deficiency in service, construction defects and non provision of common facilities in the township etc. The Residents represented to the Vice Chairman, A.P.Housing board to form a Owners Association through their letters dated 26-3-2007 and 30-8-2007 and correspondence was made through letters addressed to the Vice Chairman, A.P.Housing Board by letters dated 26-3-2007, 30-8-2007, 15-9-2007, 7-11-2007, 12-11-2007, 19-11-2007, 84 flats claim letters from 30-11-2007 to 30-12-2007, 22-12-2007 which did not yield any result.
The complainant submitted that they purchased flats from A.P.Housing board and are consumers. The Association requested the Board to appoint a joint inspection committee to list out the defects and to supervise the maintenance of the buildings and Townships on 15-9-2007 but no response was received from the Board till date. The residents filed their claims of compensation due to deficiency in service and defects in construction to the opposite party from 30-11-2007 and the Association had estimated the break up on receipt of claims from 84 residents and submitted to the Board on 22-12-2007 for Rs.95,00,000/-. The complainant association issued final notice on 2-1-2008 about the deficiency in service, construction defects and non provision of common facilities in the township etc. The residents represented to the Vice Chairman, A.P.Housing Board to form a Owners Assocation through their letters dated 26-3-2007 and 30-8-2007 and when it failed to form an association on or before the due date i.e. 11-3-2007, some residents joined together and formed an association Residents Welfare Asscoation of Sanskruti Township, Ghatkesar with Regd.No.1631 of 2007 dated 10-9-2007 registered under No.782 of 1990 A.P. (Telengana Public Societies Act, 1350 Fasli) to take up their demands and the grievances with opposite party and others. Representatives of the Association approached the authorities of Housing Board and were informed that the provision of modern facilities like swimming pool, club house and commercial centre and health centre etc. had been entrusted to some big investors. As regards other defects pointed out, no steps were taken for rectifying the defects. Eleven types of major defects which are common to all 4 types, 64 blocks and 2080 flats have been brought to the notice of the officers on duty at the Township by the residents during the past 34 months requesting for arranging necessary repairs/modifications which were ignored by the officers. These defects were enumerated and brought to the notice of the Officer on Special duty at Sanskruti Township (OSD) DE, EE, Chief Engineer of APHB from 31-11-2007 to 31-12-2007. The complainant submitted that after taking delivery, the flat owners found that the promises mentioned in the brochures and advertisements in the newspapers in the year 2003 published by A.P.Housing Board had not been fulfilled. The owners started living in the flats from June 2005 and many construction defects have come to light during the past two and half years due to which maintenance became very big problem. The poor standard is on account of use of substandard material, bad workmanship, lack of proper water curing at the time of construction, defective design and construction, poor or total lack of supervision, designing defects etc. The complainant submitted that when a persons pays for the flat and also as per the conditions of the brochure and paper advertisement in the year 2003, he also pays for the common facilities and modern amenities as detailed like swimming pool, club house and commercial center, health center. The A.P.Housing Board cannot get rid of construction of the same by selecting and merely writing to the investors. The complainant submitted that modern amenities like swimming pool, club house, waste water treatment plant, school, commercial center and health center have been promised through the brochures and newspaper advertisements in the year 2003. The above amenities should have been completed by 11-3-2005 but till date modern amenities like swimming pool, club house and commercial centre and health centre are not provided. The existing residents are travelling and spending a lot for these amenities which needs compensation for the residents. The Association on behalf of its members submit that adequate compensation for their facilities must be given. The compensation should be at least Rs.3,000/- per month per each flat owner from the date of sale deed till full pledged facilities are provided by A.P.Housing Board. The complainant submitted the list of works to be rectified by the A.P.H.B. Ducts: A closed duct has been provided for passing of water, sanitary and sewerage pipes from top to bottom of the building. The size of the duct is just sufficient for passing of pipes only. Normally a man has to pass through the duct for maintenance as well as for repairs. In this case, there is no scope for a man to pass through for regular maintenance. Due to use of substandard HDPE pipes and bad workmanship, it is found that there is a leakage of water and sewerage with very had smell through the duct from top to bottom. It is found to be difficult to repair and to do maintenance. Because of the above reasons, leakages are found in the bath rooms, kitchen and as it is bad water it is giving bad smell attracting mosquitoes, files etc. Further, dampness was observed along the walls, thereby forming fungus. In some cases, bath rooms have to be abandoned for regular use till the repairs are carried out. This is a serious health hazard for the residents. It is requested that APHB may appoint an expert committee to go into the details and find a proper solution and all P.V.C. HDPE pipe lines will be replaced with G.I. pipes and cast Iron sewerage pipe lines. Common Corridors: The floor tiling work in the corridors and stair cases of four storied buildings A & B and D blocks is incomplete. This need to be done further. Water Tanks, Gauges and Ladders: Water Tanks leakages to be rectified, ladders are to be fixed properly, water level gauges to be fixed for each tank.
Electrical cables: No trenches have been provided for underground cables from the transformer to the buildings and street light points. The substandard electrical cables with, number of joints have been provided. The power break downs are occurring due to melting of joints frequently due to the above reasons, APHB has to rectify the above deficiencies in consultation with the APCPDCL Engineers, with a time bound program.
Main Common Water Pipe Lines: There are number of leakages in water lines laid down Main Overhead Water Tank to all the blocks laid in open areas due to the trench provided for these pipes is not having sufficient cushion and depth. Due to use of substandard HDPE pipes, valves and bad workmanship, there are number of times breakages and leakages of water lines leading to stoppage of water supply which has occurred during the last year.
Security system: There are no permanent security posts, provided till date as promised in the brochure. Fire Protection: The flats of Ten storied Buildings have already been sold by APHB but the fire fighting system is not effective till date even though considerable number of families have occupied and living in the flats. Fit for occupancy certificate has not been obtained from statutory authorities till date.
Telephone Land line cables: As promised in the advertisement, thee are no Telephone cables laid down from the exchange point, from Block AB 17 to all the 64 blocks till date, due to which BSNL could not extend the facility of land line with intercom facility to the residents and security points. Provision for Incinerator: At present the garbage is being thrown all round the periphery of the compound of the township. There is no provision for dumping yard for dumping of garbage and no mechanism have been planned for effective dispose of the same. This is becoming a health hazard. Provision of incinerators to be provided on priority basis by the APHB.
10.Lifts: Power failure and low voltage has become a routine feature in the township due to which lifts are getting stuck up in between the floor, creating panic situations. This is likely to result in very unpleasant situation/serious accidentals especially when the children, ladies or senior persons are using the lifts. The residents are afraid to allow their children to use the lifts and elder persons are also afraid to use the lifts and at the same time, they cannot avoid using lifts. We fell that there is an inherent lacuna in the safety features of the lift and the APHB has not opted the right model of the lift due to which the residents are subjected to panic several times every day. In order to avoid such panic situation and to improve the safety, it is necessary to incorporate suitable device and programming so as to ensure that in case there is power failure or low voltage, the lift stops only at the immediately lower floor and door opens automatically. For 10 storied buildings diesel generator automatic on an off system needs to be provided. In view of the above, we request the APHB to arrange appropriate modification of the lifts immediately within a period of two months.
11.Common facilities at Each block: Room with attached toilet in the stilt floor of each block for common use (as per brochure) toilet cum bath rooms floor tiles, wall tiles, wash basins, sanitary fittings are not available and window is not fixed in the pump house room and garbage rooms, head room doors and all the construction defects and incomplete works to be rectified and these are to be handed over to the existing building wise Residents Welfare Association representatives for common use.
Construction company NCC stores to be get it vacated in the stilt floors and common rooms.
12.Maintenance: Maintenance services are not provided to the satisfaction of residents for the last two and half years. Lot of flats are occupied by the residents.
Facility provider is not attending to the grievance of residents in time, such as lifts, power problems, security, housekeeping, gardening, water audit, energy/power audit etc. Due to such delays the residents have to face high power bills and water bills. It has come to our notice that the Facility Management Services contract bids for the Sanskruti townships for a period of one year have been finalized recently to M/s. K.L.Technical Services. From our past experience, the past facilitator M/s Property solutions and your staff had not performed to the satisfaction of the residents. This has been brought to the notice of your good self on 14th August and the APHB authorities on several occasions without any positive response. According to us, the primary reason for such a bad situation was that, no knowledgeable, fulltime, exclusive person from APHB was posted at the Township and the residents of the township were not involved in supervision of the maintenance activities of the township. In our opinion, the under mentioned points need to be considered before concluding the service maintenance contract, in order to improve the maintenance to the satisfaction of the residents.
One senior township Maintenance knowledgeable person to be hired through out sourcing agency by the APHB need to be deputed full time to look after/to supervise the maintenance.
A joint committee comprising of the APHB, Facility Management services company and the Registered Residents Welfare Association functioning in the township to be formed to monitor day to day maintenance problems of the residents. This Committee should meet atleast once in a week to monitor the maintenance. Payments to the Facility Management Services Company to be made only after obtaining the Service Satisfactory Certificate wise from the above committee.
As already mentioned in our letter dated 30th August, 2007 most of the residents are senior citizens depending on pensions and middle class government employees.
Any rise is the amount of maintenance charges will be a burden on them and hence we except there will not be rise in the amount to be paid towards monthly maintenance.
APHB failed to provide Maintenance Accounts Statements to all the residents, failed to form Residents Society till date and conduct elections to install an Executive body for smooth maintenance of the Township as per the sale deed conditions and brochure. As the residents are paying every month towards security and maintenance, sanitary fittings losses due to thefts has to be paid by APHB/Facility Management Services. As the accounts have not been settled by the APHB by 11-3-2007 as promised in the brochure, no penalty should be levied on the residents, for the alleged delay of payment of monthly Maintenance.
13. Inclusion of Township in the GHMC: Proposal to be submitted by the APHB to the Commissioner of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation for inclusion of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation or Hyderabad Metropolitan authority.
14. Maintenance of Roads, Parks, Illumination and Sanitation: Proposals to be submitted pertaining to the expenditure on maintenance of roads, parks, sanitation, drainage and street lighting by the Hyderabad Metropolitan authority/HUDA and also dialogue with M/s.Raheja IT park and Infosis Management may be initiated to act as official sponsors for the maintenance of roads, parks, illumination and sanitation as is practiced in the High tech city and GHMC.
15. Providing of Senior Citizens Day Care Center at Block A7 stilt floor at unallotted non car parking area for common use of senior citizens in the Township, Providing of 1 acre site in favour of Registered body of Senior citizens forum Singapore Township at club house premises for the setting up of the Senior Citizens Multi service center: The Andhra Pradesh Housing Board has not planned any Senior Citizens recreational facilities for the senior citizens. As a matter of national policy of Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India, Old Age homes, multi service center for senior citizens need to be provided in the integrated township.
16. Provision for Burial ground: Place, building, water, power to be provided for Burial ground.
17. This claim is in respect of the Residents Welfare Association members who have included in the list herein enclosed.
This list is not exhaustive and may be altered or amended and added to as and when required and necessary.
We, therefore, call upon A.P.Housing Board i.
to pay the amount of Rs.95,00,000/- as damages for not providing modern facilities as promised from 11-3-2005 together with further damages within two weeks of the receipt of notice failing which we will be constrained to take recourse to legal remedies on behalf of the claimants at your risks to costs and consequences.
ii.
To direct to create modern facilities within reasonable time iii.
To direct rectification of defective works and provide for such other facilities as required in integrated Township listed above within two months iv.
To provide a modern club, swimming pool facility and Senior Citizen Multi Services Center within 8 acres earmarked for the club v.
To give 2 acres to the Residential Welfare Association Regd. No.1631/2007 for creating a recreation center, community hall, Township Maintenance office for 2080 flats, residents of the township along with appropriate building within 6 months vi.
To give 1 acre to the senior Citizens forum Regd. No.1420/07 dt.6-8-2007 for creating a Multi services center to the senior citizens of the township within one month.
The complainant submitted that he corresponded with opposite party personally and through letters and final notice on 2-1-2008 requesting for release of compensation amount of Rs.95,00,000/- due to the 97 complaints but there are no fruitful results.
The complainant submits that because of non release of the funds by the opposite party, the complainant was forced to suffer with defective flats, non availability of modern facilities and health hazards. The complainant submitted that the opposite party refusing to pay the claim amount in whole is arbitrary and in gross violation of the sprit of the consumer laws .
Hence the complaint for a direction to the opposite party
i) to pay the complainant the sum of Rs.95,00,000/-
ii) to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards expenses he incurred in making correspondence on the issues
iii) to pay Rs.50,000/-
towards mental agony/suffering.
iv) to pay costs of the petition
v) to direct to create modern facilities promised within reasonable time.
vi) to direct rectification of defective works and provide for such other facilities as required in integrated Township listed above within two months.
vii) to provide a modern club, swimming pool facility and senior citizens Multi Services Centre within 8 acres earmarked for the club
viii) to give 2 acres to the Residents Welfare Association Regd. No.1631/2007 for creating a recreation center, community hall, Township Maintenance office, for 2080 flats, Residents of the Township along with appropriate building within 6 months.
ix) to give 1 acre to the Senior Citizens forum Regd. No.1420/07 dt.6-8-2007 for creating a Multi services center to the senior citizens of the township within one month.
x) to appoint a Advocate Commission or Approved Engineer to inspect the construction defects and to estimate in the flats at Sanskruthi Township, Hyderbad.
xi) Grant such any other orders and further reliefs as the Honble State Commission deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Opposite party filed counter denying the allegations made in the complaint and submitted that the complainant is not a consumer and that there is no privity of contract or obligations as between the complainant and them and the complaint is to be dismissed on this ground alone. They further submitted that this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint for the reason that the complainant as such has no grievance as per the complaint and the complaint is certain individuals having certain grievances. Each individual has a separate and distinct and personal grievance as against them which the individual owner has to get redressed. Further, merely by complaining different individual claims, who are not parties to the complaint and who as seen from the record available did not give any express authority cannot combine together to enhance the valuation so as to bring the same within the purview of the jurisdiction of this Commission. The complaint is liable to be dismissed on this ground and also non joinder of proper parties and cause of action(s). Some of the parties on whose behalf the complaint is alleged to be taking up the cause are not the owners of the flats and they have no locus stand to make any complaints. An association styled Residents Welfare Association and another association viz. Singapore Class (Sanskruti) Township Welfare Association are operating on their own without there being any authority.
All the owners of the flats are yet to form the society as per the terms and conditions of the sale and the same is under process.
Mr.M.Raghava Rao, the alleged general secretary to the complaint himself does not own any flat in the Sanskruti township and has no authority to be the office bearer and prosecute the complaint on behalf of the association. He has been instigating the residents by collecting individual signatures by visiting their flats.
A perusal of the byelaws of the association will clearly show that the owners of the flats are not the only members and as such any welfare association of the township can comprise of only the owners and not third parties. The rules and regulations are very vogue and do not cater to the needs of the owners of Sanskruti Township Flats. It is to be noted that virtually the persons named in the managing committee are the ones figuring in the alleged extraordinary general body meeting.
The names are virtually the same, clearly showing poor response and members on the part of the complainant.
Further as against 2080 flats, as seen from the general body, even assuming to be correct, only the names of 58 people figure but all of them are not owners. Even among this 58 names, 11 members have not signed the resolution.
A detailed statement is annexed (Annexure-i)herewith showing the persons who are not owners of the flats from out of general body resolution, therefore, the allegations of the complaint are not correct and the complaint is not maintainable. They admitted that they delivered possession of the flats as per its promise, the allegation that after delivery of possession, APHB did not fulfill the promises are not correct. They denied the allegation of defects in construction, use of substandard material, bad workmanship, lack of proper water curing at the time of construction, defective design and construction, poor or total lack of supervision etc. They submitted that the further allegations about defects in the bathrooms, kitchen, service area, water, sewerage lines, ducts, internal roads are all incorrect. They submitted that the bathroom have been provided with SPARTEK make antiskid tiles i.e. REGENCY make CR 23 tiles and SPARTEK make ASIY tiles and they are antiskid tiles. They have used CHLORONATE POLY VINYL CHLORIDE pipes for water supply and these pipes were introduced by the company named ASTRAL POLY TECHNIK LTD. under license from VUBRIZOL (formerly NOVEON, USA) under brand name ASTRAL FLOW GUARD CPVC.
Even as per agreement, as between the APHB, CESMA International Pvt. Ltd. CPVC pipes are to be installed for water supply and are made from speciality plastic chemical known as CHLORONATED POLY VINYL CHLORIDE. They are much superior to regular PVC pipes which are normally used by builders earlier.
Presently the builders are using the CPVC pipes for its better quality an the life of CPVC pipes is more than 50 years when compared to GI pipes which is 20 to 30 years and are enclosing the product catalogue of ASTRAL, which would clearly show the correct facts. In so far as the leakages are concerned, the reason is totally different and is not in the magnanimity in which it is now sought to be made out by the complainant. It is submitted that in a venture of this magnitude, some leakages here and there are usual, the facilitator is attending to this work.
However, there has been serious impediment in carrying out the leakage work at the joints as the occupancy of the flats is not full and consequently if the water is leaking from upper floor, and the subject flat is not occupied, it becomes difficult for the facilitator to attend to the work as access to the problem area is prevented. This is not in the hands of the APHB or facilitator in as much as the possession and keys of the flat are already handed over to the concerned allottee. In order to find a solution to this problem, APHB has already issued a press note and also placed the same in APHB website requesting the allottees to handover one set of keys to the facilitator to enable it to attend to repair works as and when necessary and that they are prepared to look into this aspect and plan some alternatives.
Opposite party submitted that the House Committee of Legislative Assembly did not visit the township in connection with the works, construction defects or non provision of common facilities. The visit of house committee was in connection with the joint venture projects and financial viability thereon. At that time a representation was given. However, the observations as alleged were never made by house committee and no correspondence is addressed in this regard to APHB. Opposite party submitted that few residents appear to have formed into an association under the name and style of complainant association. They submitted that any grievance have to be ventilated only through the owners of the subject flats and only residents cannot have any grievance as against them. They further submitted that the provision for modern amenities like swimming pool, club, commercial center etc. are already made and it is in progress. Opposite party submitted that when the owners/ residents pointed out any defect, the same was attended to. The complaints dt.31-11-2007 and 31-12-2007 relate to certain repairs said to have been conducted by individual flat owners, however, they are general in nature and do not contain any details and submit that a general format was prepared and signatures were obtained on the same format.
In some cases, APHB received blank forms and particulars of the works are not mentioned and the complainant is called to furnished the details particulars and they reserve their right to file appropriate reply upon receiving the particulars. They submitted that in a venture of this magnitude where APHB has undertaken the work from the scrap level, it takes some time for the attendant facilities to come up over which they have no control.
Moreover in the brochure the statement is about the facilities being provided and several facilities as demanded were never committed in the brochure and APHB does not have control over several other uncertain aspects like power supply etc. and submitted that there is no deficiency of service. They submitted that they attended to the works as and when complaints are received and the alleged break up of expenditure involved in the alleged deficiency of service is totally incorrect, non-existent.
Opposite party submitted that they have not charged for common facilities and had given a promise to buyers of the flats in respect of IT parks, school, transport, Medical, shopping, club house etc. It is a conceptual view of the township coming in near future. However, IT park construction work is going and the place earmarked for the school is also handed over to the school, sanction for construction is also obtained by the party intending to start the school and the construction shall be commenced. The remaining obligations pointed out are inter-related to other organizations.
Opposite party submitted that the allottees/owners of the flats have not occupied the flats. The following are the year wise particulars of flats handed over which will throw some light on this aspect:
In the year 2005 84 flats In the year 2006 1377 flats In the year 2007 495 flats In the year 2008 25 flats Total 1981 flats ======== Opposite party submitted that they had been attending to the complaints of individual flat owners/occupant pertaining to the flat. They are required to maintain a register for complaints and the works thereon and accordingly the individual complaints are registered and attended to after which the signature of the person is recorded confirming the factum of their attending to the work. In order to pay personal attention and suggest ways and means of resolving the problems, the APHB vide proceedings No.1295/B3/2008 dated 17-4-2008 constituted a high power committee with the following officers to sort out the grievances of the flats owners of Sanskruti Township with immediate effect:
i) Sri Siva Prasad, superintending Engineer
ii) Sri N.Krishnam Raju, Quality Control Consultant
iii) Sri T.V.S.Ratnam, PRO & OSD Out of the above three, Sri N.Krishnam Raju is a retired Engineer in R&B Department, Government of A.P. and was also Quality Control Engineer (Consultant) at the time when the project was underway. The committee has since visited the township and has submitted its preliminary report before this Commission. Opposite party submitted that the Secretary of the complainant, Mr.Raghava Rao, is instigating the other flat owners not to pay the revised monthly maintenance charges. In fact, A.P.H.B. has been spending the monthly maintenance charges from the corpus as the allottees have been irregular in paying the maintenance charges and as all the allottees are not available at their respective flat and the correspondence sent to the address furnished in the APHB office is being returned, the arrears have mounted. A.P.H.B. is also taking steps to realize its due for maintenance. Further the maintenance charges collected are directly related to the expenditure. The following statements would clarify the position:
DCB OF ALL CATEGORIES OF FLATS i.e. PENT HOUSE, DUPLEX, C.A. & A.B. BLOCKS IN SINGAPORE CLASS TOWNSHIP AT POCHARAM FROM NOVEMBER, 2007 TO MARCH, 2008 Month Arrears Due Rs.
Monthly Demand Rs.
Total demand Rs.
Collection Rs.
Balance Rs.
1.
2.
3. 4 5 6
Nov, 07 1,68,02,232 11,52,110 1,79,54,442 7,45,517 1,72,08,925 Dec.07 1,72,08,925 11,52,110 1,83,61,035 8,36,032 1,75,25,003 Jan, 08 1,75,25,003 19,63,120 1,94,88,123 16,38,714 1,78,49,409 Feb,08 1,78,49,409 19,63,120 1,98,12,529 18,77,008 1,79,35,521 Mar,08 1,79,35,521 19,63,120 1,98,98,641 28,01,829 1,70,96,812
1. Revenue at the original rates, when 64 lifts & STP is under Initial free Maintenance period which was expired by 7/2007 11.52 lakhs
2. Projected Revenue at enhanced rates with effect from 1/08 Onwards 19.63 lakhs
3. Projected expenditure from 7/2007 onwards 19.10 lakhs
4. Outstanding balance available in maintenance account as On 31-3-2008 (including Corpus fund of Rs.2.848 crore) 97.74 lakhs
5. Outstanding arrears due to be collected at original rates up To 12/07 and at enhanced rates from 1/08 to 3/08 170.96 lakhs As seen from the above, APHB. is absorbing the expenses for the present and the arrears will be collected from the owners of the flats. However, A.P.H.B. is encountering difficulties in getting the collections for the reasons stated above. The details of water supplied to the township is annexed to this counter. As seen from the statement as against the standard requirement of 35 Ltrs. Per day per person, the average consumption as on date is bout 326.63 ltrs. per day per person. Of course, the average supply in city may be in the range of 50 ltrs. per day per person. Moreover, in the township, opposite party has taken the average persons per flat as 4 and perhaps the average would be only about 3 persons and the supply per head would come to about 435.50 ltrs and thus the allegation being leveled about sufficient quantity of water not being supplied is absolutely incorrect. The following are the replies to the allegations in the complaint:
1.
Ducts: Ducts are internal parts of the flat and do not come under common facilities as claimed. No HDPE pipes are used in ducts. The leakages are not to the magnitude as alleged and when the same are found, the same is being attended to and rectified. However, some of the allottees have not occupied the flats on account of which the concerned worker cannot reach the site of leakage for rectification. The CPVC pipes are used for water line and PVC for sewer line which is standard adopted in almost all the modern multistoried buildings in India and abroad. Before adopting the specifications, a project monitoring committee was formed which inspected different materials available in the market and selected the appropriate material required to be used considering the model flat available at head office of APHB.
2. COMMON CORRIDORS: The original agreement does not envisage the provision for tiles in the corridor. However, on the recommendations of monitoring committee, rough ceramic tiles have been provided opposite to the main door and lift door in each floor in the corridor.
3. Water tanks, gauges and Ladders: A movable ladder is provided in each terrace block to facilitate, cleaning and checking of water levels etc. There are no leakages.
4. Electrical cables: For the electrical power lines, ARMOUD cables are provided which need not require any separate duct. The melting of cables has not occurred in any of the blocks. Cables used for electrical works are as per ISI standards.
5. Main common water Pipe Lines: The HDPE pipe lines laid for this purpose are as per standard designs taking into consideration of all losses. There is no stoppage of water on account of any breakage. The leakage occurs some times because of chocking of entrapped air and water hammer problems. This is a common phenomenon, which is duly attended to. However, at no point of time, the supply of water was interrupted to any of the flat.
6. Security system: The security person is stationed at the respective flats. The staff is being maintained by the agency employed by APHB presently.
7. FIRE PROTECTION: All the protection systems provided to all the 10 stories blocks as per the design and systems have been executed as per the directions of the Fire Service Department and the system is functioning.
8. Telephone, Land Line Cables: The work was given to M/s.Ray Consultants and Contractors. However, the work was stopped by the said agency after executing in part. Most of the residents are utilizing the WLL phones provided by BSNL, CDMA phones and other operating systems.
9. Provision for incinerator: APHB never promised such provision. The arrangements for disposal of garbage will be to be done through the normal carrying methods.
10. Lifts: The power failure is not in the hands of APHB. However, as and when there is any problem in the lift or power cut, the security guards employed in the block are taking care of lift breakdown and 3 persons are being engaged from the lift manufacturers and under AMC who are available at site from 8 AM to 6.30 PM.
11. A room with attached toilet is provided in stilt floor for common use. The toilet already has tiles, wash basin etc. Window is not deliberately fixed for garbage room and pump house rooms, closing will lead to sound, vibration and also block watch from outside.
Closure of garbage room will lead to faster decay of garbage and smell.
12. APHB is maintaining the township by outsourcing and doing its best to keep the residents in a happy living environment. Many employees of APHB including the Executive Engineer (Central Division) and the project coordinator are staying in the township with their families.
Further as and when the society is formed, the maintenance shall be the responsibility of the society and for the present the senior offices including Executive Engineer (Central Division) is looking after the same.
13. The roads, parks etc are presently being maintained in the township, involving outsiders in the maintenance would also require them to be given a say in the management and other affairs besides their willingness.
The Raheja IT Park, Infosys have not yet come up and they are at construction stage.
14. So far as provision for burial ground is concerned, the concerned municipality provides for the same and making such provision in the township would create several problems including religious and may disturb the overall environment and communal harmony and is outside the purview of the allotment conditions.
Opposite party further stated that out of the alleged 84 complainants, who are part of complainant association, about 28 flat owners are purchased after March, 2005 i.e. the flats were completed in all respects and ready for occupation. Thus, these flat owners purchased the same after being fully satisfied about the quality and nature of construction and facilities. Thus 56 persons purchased flats prior to March, 2005 and 28 persons purchased after March, 2005. Out of 56 purchasers, only 30 were allottees and balance are third party purchasers, similarly, out of 28 purchasers, after May, 2005 only 12 were original applicants and the balance are third party purchasers. Therefore, it is clear that these flat owners purchased the same after being fully satisfied about the quality and nature of construction and facilities. Further in March, 2005 when the subsequent announcements were made for sale, it was clear that the facilities offered are only conceptual.
Opposite party further submitted that certain persons have been threatening the security personnel and the workers at the site and have been complaints during past in this regard.
Mr.Raghava Rao is actively threatening the workers and giving complaints against them to the facilitator, who in turn had to approach APHB complaining about the same. Opposite party further submitted that some allottees/occupants had carried out certain modifications, alterations both inside and outside the flat for their convenience. However, some of these alterations are also affecting others. For instance in some of the toilets certain seepages are being pointed out it is noticed that geysers have been fixed on the walls, where water pipe lines are running. During the fixing the bolts for geysers there is every possibility of disturbance of water pipe lines. Likewise some persons have carried out alterations in the wash basins etc. and APHB if requires shall carry out personal inspection in respect of each flat and thereupon the APHB reserves its right to file additional counter and therefore submitted that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts and is liable to be dismissed and prayed to dismiss the compliant.
Complainant filed the affidavit of its Secretary Mr.M.Raghava Rao, in lieu of evidence reiterating the facts in the complainant and got marked Exs.A1 to A56 on his behalf. Exs.A57 to A72 were filed along with I.A.No.138/2008 in C.C.No.3/2008.
Opposite party also filed affidavits of its Executive Engineer (Hg) in lieu of evidence. Deputy Executive Engineer in the office of A.P.Housing Board attached to Sanskruti Township in lieu of evidence and Officer on Special Duty (OSD) Sanskruti Township by way of evidence and reiterated the facts stated in the counter and Exs.B1 to B16 are marked on their behalf.
The point for consideration is whether there is any deficiency of service on behalf of the opposite party and if the complainant is entitled for the relief prayed for in the complaint?
Ex.A1 are brochures of A.P.H.B. issued in 2003 & 2005.
Ex.A2 & A3 are advertisements of A.P.H.B. in the newspaper dated 11-4-2003 and 20-3-2005. Ex.A4 is news item about visit of House Committee dated 9-11-2006. Ex.A5 is news item about dampness/health hazard. Ex.A6 is representation of residents of A.P.H.B. requesting Vice Chairman to form a owners association dated 26-3-2007 and 30-8-2007. Ex.A7 is Registration Certificate of Residents Welfare Association along with Articles of the Society, dated 10-9-2007. Ex.A8 is Representation to Residents Welfare Association to A.P.H.B. on 16 issues dated 15-9-2007. Ex.A9 is representation to Housing Minister on 16 issues/joint meeting with V.C. of A.P.H.B. dated 17-9-2007 and 12-11-2007. Ex.A10 is reminder to APHB on 16 issues dated 7-11-2007. Ex.A11 is invitation of Residents Welfare Association (RWAS for short) inviting Housing Minister & V.C. of APHB for General Body Meeting cum Joint Meeting with residents to resolve issues dated 19-11-2007. Ex.A12 is list of claims and claimants submitted by RWAS to V.C., A.P.H.B. on all issues dated 22-12-2007. Ex.A13 final notice dated 2/4/1/12008 for payment of Rs.95,00,000/-. Ex.A14 is Final notice for payment of Rs.99,22,000/- dated 2-1-2008. Ex.A15 is Resolution of RWS E.C. Members dated 01-12-2007. Ex.A16 is Resolution of RWS General Body Members dated 31-12-2007. Ex.A17 is Claims submitted by 97 residents requesting RWS to take up with APHB dated 30-11-2007 and 6-1-2008. Ex.A18 is Regd. Sale deed No.5158/05 dated 19-7-2005. Ex.A19 is Complainant letter to form an Association under agies of APHB dated 26-3-2007. Ex.A20 is letter from Officer on Special Duty APHB for conducting joint meeting on 29-1-2008 to discuss maintenance problems dated 26-1-2008. Ex.A21 is Minutes of meeting held on 29-1-2008. Ex.A22 is letter of Officer on Special duty to depute two persons from petitioner association on 29-1-2008 to discuss maintenance problems dated 31-1-2008. Ex.A23 is APHB letter for enhancement of Maintenance charges dated 13-2-2008. Ex.A24 is letter by complainant objecting enhancement of maintenance charges dated 16-2-2008. Ex.A25 is letter dt.22-2-2008 to refund the maintenance deposit amount.
Ex.A26 is letter of E.E., A.P.H.B. letter about water supply dated 11-3-2008. Ex.A27 is reply letter by RWAS to APHB on water losses dated 13-3-2008. Ex.A28 is RWAS letter dated 20-3-2008 requesting information under RTA on 11 issues.
Ex.A29 is RWAS letter dated 24-3-2008 to V.C., APHB on thefts etc. and copy submitted to Human Rights Commission. Ex.A30 is petition before A.P.State Human Right Commission dated 27-3-2008. Ex.A31 is receipt of RTA Act fee for Rs.10/-. Ex.A32 is list of residents prepared by the Association dated 3-4-2008. Ex.A33 is letter offering voluntary services to maintenance monitoring committee dated 3-4-2008. Ex.A34 is Resolution of RWS Executive Body Members dated 1-4-2008. Ex.A35 is list of issues block-wise and flat wise submitted by the Residents to take up with APHB dated 3-4-2008. Ex.A36 is Resident Complainant for Rs.30,000/-. Ex.A37 is Pamphlet of Singapore Class Township Welfare Association Regd.21/2008 dated 4-4-2008. Ex.A38 is list of 139 complainants list filed before opposite party High Power Committee dated 14-6-2008. Ex.A39 is A.P.Govt. G.O.Rt.No.229 dated 15-9-2001. Ex.A40 is HUDA Technical permission for Development of Group Housing in Sy.No.2 and 10 of Pocharam dated 1-8-2002. Ex.A41 is HUDA Technical approval of building plans for Commercial complex in Sy.No.2 and 10 of Pocharam dated 28-12-2007. Ex.A42 is HUDA supply of information under RTA Act dt.8-12-2007 that Sanskruthi Township, HUDA has accorded only technical approval for the plans submitted by APHB under Building Regulations G.O.Ms.No.423 dated 31-7-1998. Ex.A43 is dt.24-10-2007 HUDA supply of information along with statement. Ex.A44 is dated 9-4-2008 of APHB supply of information under RTA Act Sanskruthi township, promised amenities are not provided till date.
Ex.A45 is letter dated 29-5-2007 of Additional Director of Fire & Emergency Services informing that the builder has not obtained NOC for occupancy from the Department. Ex.A46 is dated 29-6-2004 from Director General of Fire & Emergency Services, supply of information under RTA Act Sanskruthi Township-Plans should be Multistoried Buildings Regulations, 1981 and NBC. Ex.A47 is dated 14-12-2006 from Director General of Fire & Emergency Services supply of information under RTA Act, Sanskruthi Township and Memorandum to Honble A.P.High Court W.P.No.26365/2005 and inspection report dated 9-8-2006 short false. Ex.A48 is Notice for Violation of Fire Prevention and Fire Safety Measures dated 14-12-2006. Ex.A49 letter dated 29-5-2008 from complainant to opposite party pointing deficiencies while implementing the approved plans, development of amenities etc. provision for senior citizens, ladies, TTD temple, Kalyana Mandapam in future expansion. Ex.A50 is complainant letter dated 9-6-2008 to Chief Minister to implement G.Os. and brochure commitments to provide amenities. Ex.A51 is complainant letter to V.C.HUDA and APHB to develop 5 parks dated 9-6-2008. Ex.A52 is details of site plan of proposed development in S.No.2 and 10 of Pocharam belonging to APHB dated 31-7-2002. Ex.A53 is Permit No.3946/mp2/h/02 letter No.3964 dt.31-7-2002 Ex.A54 is Huda technical approved vide letter no.3964.mp2/h/2002 dt.1-8-02 Disallowed C& D blocks. Ex.A55 is information by APHB under RTA Act dated 21-6-2008. Ex.A56 are photos. Ex.A57 of HUDA Approval letter dated 1-8-2002. Ex.A58 is Resolution of Executive Committee dated 1-4-2008. Ex.A59 is letter of Officer on Special Duty, A.P.H.B. dated 17-4-2008. Ex.A60 is circular dated 25-4-2008 of other association. Ex.A61 is reply submitted by APHB to Human Rights Commission dated 30-4-2008. Ex.A62 is reply affidavit in HRC No.968/2008 dated 27-5-2008. Ex.A63 is Deficiencies in approval of plans dated 29-5-2008. Ex.A64 is Representation of Residents Welfare Association to Chief Minister dated 9-6-2008. Ex.A65 is Representation of Residents Welfare Association to V.C. HUDA and APHB dated 9-6-2008. Ex.A66 is FIR No.158/2008 of Ghatkesar Police Station dated 21-6-2008. Ex.A67 is Notice by OSD, APHB to Mr.M.Raghava Rao dated 20-6-2008. Ex.A68 is reply of Mr.M.Raghava Rao to OSD notice dated 21-6-2008. Ex.A69 is appeal by OSD, APHB to the residents dated 23-7-2008. Ex.A70 is CRL M.P.No.1051/08 in CR.No.158/08 dated 28-6-2008. Ex.A71 is Anticipatory Bail grant order in 158/08 dated 7-7-2008. Ex.A72 is Representation of Association to United Federation of Residents Welfare Association of Hyderabad dated 31-12-2007.
Ex.B1 is Printout of Website.
Ex.B2 is Product catalogue issued by Astral-regarding PVC pipes. Ex.B3 is Notification dated 19-3-2005 issued by APHB. Ex.B4 is list of details for 84 complainants in C.C.No.4/2008. Ex.B5 is Quantity of water received/requirement per day at the township. Ex.B6 is report of High Power Committee dt.17-5-2008, 14-6-2008, 20-10-2008 and 3-11-2008. Ex.B7 is Extract of contract agreement between APHB & M/s.CESMA dt.30-1-2003. Ex.B8 is Sale deed dated 2-4-2008. Ex.B9 Paper publication extract of Saakshi dt.17-4-08. Ex.B10 is Statement showing status of complainants in C.C.No.3/2008. Ex.B11 is status of claimants in C.C.No.4/208. Ex.B12 is list of details for 99 claimants in C.C.No.3/2008.
Ex.B13 is list of details for 84 claimants in C.C.No.4/2008. Ex.B14 is copy of complaint in HRC No.3736/08. Ex.B15 is extract of register for rectification. Ex.B16 is pamphlet dt.13-3-2008.
Now we address ourselves first to the contention of the opposite party that the complaint is not maintainable on the ground that some of the parties on whose behalf the complaint has allegedly taken up the cause are not flat owners and as such they have no locus standi to make any complaint and that the alleged General Secretary of the complainant i.e. Mr.Raghava Rao, does not own any flat and therefore he does not have any authority to be an office bearer and file this complaint.
The next contention of the learned counsel for the opposite party is that a perusal of the bye-laws of the Association clearly show that the flat owners are not the only persons and that as against 2080 flats, even assuming to be correct only the names of 58 people figure in all and even among these 58 names, 11 persons have not signed the resolution and therefore the complaint is not maintainable.
We observe from the record that Ex.A7 is a certificate issued by the Registrar of Societies on 10-9-2007 certifying that the Residents Welfare Association, Sanskruti Township, Ghatkeswar is registered under the A.P. Societies Act, 2001. The Memorandum of Articles of Association along with the rules and regulations has also been filed. Ex.A15 is the Resolution passed by the complainant association authorizing the General Secretary to initiate proceedings before the Forum. With respect to the contention of the opposite party that the General Secretary i.e. Mr.Raghava Rao does not have locus standi to file the complaint, the complainant has filed Ex.A73 which is a G.P.A. holder and father of Mr.M.Ravi and Ms.Saritha who are possessing flats in Block A7 i.e. flat No.403, Block C5 i.e. flat No.301 and also in Block A45 i.e. flat No.202 and the said General Secretary has been residing in flat No.403 of block A47 from January, 2007. The Apex court in LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. M.K.GUPTA reported in AIR 1994 SC 787 held that the activities of Housing Construction Bodies can be defined as service. In another decision reported in (1998) CPJ page-7 (NC) Vice Chairman, A.P.Housing Board and others v. A.P.Housing Board (LIG) Housing Beneficiaries Association, Bhimavaram, the National Commission has considered that A.P.Housing Board (LIG) Housing Beneficiaries Association as a complaint and has upheld the order of the State Commission which has allowed the complaint with respect to certain deficiencies. Keeping in view the aforementioned judgements, we are of the considered view that the complaint is maintainable under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
It is the case of the complainant that the opposite party has lured the public by printing attractive brochure to purchase flats in their township, which is of international standard and that the design and construction will be carried out by international company, by name, CESMA of Singapore and that it would be a fully integrated township and the flats would be delivered within 24 months i.e. by 11-3-2005. The complainant further submits that the opposite party would pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month as penalty as per G.O.Rt.No.229. It is submitted by the complainant that the opposite party has entrusted the work to M/s.CESMA International Pvt. Ltd. by entering into an agreement on 30-1-2003 and advertisement for sale of flats was given on 11-4-2003 and the construction ought to have been completed by 11-3-2005 but till now opposite party did not provide the amenities technically approved plan sanctioned by HUDA and as promised in the brochure and the basic facilities like schools, shops, hospitals, club house, swimming pool, community centre, telephone services etc. are not provided and opposite party used sub standard material in the construction and also in plumbing and sewerage because of which the complainant association is not able to live peacefully.
It is further submitted that the following deficiencies have to be rectified by the opposite party:
a)Ducts : Because of the non standard size of the ducts, substandard CPVC pipes and bad workmanship, there is leakage of water and sewerage through the ducts from top to bottom and the same has to be replaced with G.I pipes and cost iron sewerage pipelines and accordingly the duct size needs to be modified.
b) Common Corridors: The floor tiling work in the corridors and stair cases of four storied buildings blocks is incomplete.
c) Roof Leakages, Water Tanks leakages to be rectified, water level gauges and ladders to be fixed for each tank.
d) Electrical cables : No trenches have been provided for underground cables and substandard electrical cables were used due to which the joints are melting and power breakdowns are occurring and the same have to be remedied.
e) Main Common Water Pipe Lines : Leakages in water lines are occurring because of usage of HDPE pipes and valves and bad workmanship and the pipes do not have sufficient cushion as the trench provided for these pipes is not having enough depth.
f) Security system : There are no permanent security system and no permanent security posts are provided.
g) Fire Protection : The fire protection system is not well equipped.
Fire escaping way not provided and no Fit for Occupancy certificate is obtained from the statutory authorities.
h) Telephone lines : The Township has not provided BSNL landline with intercom facility to the residents and security points.
i) There is no provision for incinerator and garbage yard and the waste material is thrown all around and there is no dumping yard and it has become a health hazard to the residents.
j) Lifts:There is no suitable device to stop the lifts on the next floor down in the event of power failure.
k) Common facilities at each block, room with attached toilet in the stilt floor of each block for common use is not made available.
l) Maintenance: The maintenance services are not provided to the satisfaction of residents. Some residents are suffering due to non availability of water due to failure of water pipe lines and sewerage pipelines and opposite party failed to provide.
The complainant submits that they are seeking a direction to opposite party to allow them to supervise the maintenance of township and conduct elections block wise for the welfare of all the 65 blocks and to handover the maintenance to the residents association and that the maximum period of maintenance by the opposite party is for two years full, which expired on 30-6-2007 and therefore opposite party cannot charge maintenance charges to the complainant association. It is also the complainants case that the opposite party are housing the members of the association, collecting excessive maintenance charges and a false criminal complaint was filed against the office bearers of the complainant association.
As against these submissions made by the complainant, the learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that there are no construction defects and denies the use of sub standard material, bad workmanship, lack of supervision and also the defects in bath rooms, kitchen, service area, water, sewerage lines, ducts, internal roads. He submits that the allegations made by the complainant that there is no antiskid flooring in the bath rooms is incorrect since the bath rooms have been provided with SPARTEK made antiskid tiles i.e. Regency make CR 23 tiles and further submitted that A.P.H.B. used CPVC pipes which were introduced by a company named ASTRAL POLY TECHNIK LTD., and are superior to regular PVC pipes, since their life is more than 50 years when compared to regular GI pies which have a life span of 20 to 30 years. With respect to leakages, the learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that if the water is leaking from the upper floor and the subject flat is not occupied, it becomes difficult for the facilitator to do the work as access to the problem area is prevented. They are ready and willing to undertake these repair works, if the allottees handover one set of keys to the facilitator and allow him to attend to the repair works.
With respect to visit of House Committee, opposite party denied that the House Committee visited the township in connection with deficiency of service or for non provision of common facilities. He contends that a few residents have formed an association and submitted their grievance to this committee. He further contended that the provision of modern amenities like swimming pool, club etc. are already made and work is in progress. He contends that in the complaints made on 31-11-2007 and 31-12-2007 only relate to certain repairs which have been conducted by individual flat owners and they are general in nature and do not contain any details.
He further contended that the facilities which are demanded by the complainant were never committed in the brochure and A.P.H.B does not have any control over uncertain aspects like power supply. The learned counsel for the opposite party also submitted that they have never given a promise to the buyers of the flats in respect of I.T. park, school, transport, medical, Shopping, club house etc. and it is only a conceptual view of the township coming in the future. About 1280 complaints were received before 9-3-2007 in response to the opposite partys letter dated 27-1-2007 and all the defects were rectified. The learned counsel further contended that vide proceedings No.1295/B3/2008 dated 17-4-2008 a High Power Committee was constituted with a Superintending Engineer, Quality Control Consultant and PRO & OSD to look into the grievances in detail. It is the opposite partys case that Mr.Raghava Rao is instigating the other flat owners not to pay the monthly maintenance charges as a result of which the arrears have mounted and the maintenance charges are directly related to the expenditure. A.P.H.B. is absorbing the expenses for the present and the arrears will be collected from the owners of the flats.
C.D.I.A.No.138/2008 was filed by the complainant for appointment of an Commissioner and since a High Power Committee was already appointed to look into the representations and it also filed final report dated 20-10-2008, hence the main C.D. along with the application is being disposed of. C.D.I.A.No.137/2008 is filed with a prayer not to cancel registration of the flat and return the money and since the prayer in the main C.D. is different from the prayer in the I.A. and since the main C.D. itself is being disposed this I.A. is disallowed except with respect to receipt of additional documents.
Now we address ourselves to each deficiency raised by the complainant and the respective contention of the opposite party together with the final report of High Power Committee
a) Ducts: It is the complainants case that because of non-standard size of the ducts, sub standard CPVC pipes and bad workmanship, there is leakage of water and that the same has to be replaced with GI pipes. Opposite party submitted in their affidavit that HDPE pipes are used in ducts and the leakages are not of the magnitude as alleged and CPVC pipes are used for water line and PVC for sewer line and is a standard adopted by all multi storied buildings. We are of the considered view that the specification of ducts cannot be challenged by the complainant in the absence of any documentary evidence that the specific pipes used by the opposite party are not compatible and therefore the duct size requires no modification. However since the opposite party in para 5 of their affidavit submitted that if there are any leakages, they are prepared to look into this aspect and requested the allottees to hand over one set of keys to the facilitator to enable them to attend to the repair works as and when necessary. Keeping both these submissions, in view we are of the considered opinion that rectification and modification of the ducts/leakages are to be done as observed by High Power Committee report. Complainants are to co-operate with the opposite party.
b) Common corridors: It is the case of the complainant that floor tiling work in the corridors and stair case of the four storied buildings is incomplete. Opposite party contend that the original agreement does not envisage provision for tiles in the corridors and on recommendations of the monitoring committee, rough tiles have been provided opposite to main door and lift door in each floor in the corridor. Since the brochure does not specifically state that the common area would be covered by ceramic tiles, we disallow this claim.
c) Water Tanks, Gauges and Ladders: The contention of the complainant is that water tank leakages are to be rectified and ladders are to be fixed properly and water level gauges are to be fixed for each tank. We direct the opposite party to rectify the leakages and though the opposite party contended that a movable ladder is provided for each terrace, these ladders are to be fixed properly and water level gauges are also to be fixed for each tank.
Lift: The complainant is directed to submits its representation before the High Power Committee and the High Committee shall consider the matter.
d) Fire Fighting system: Opposite party is directed to provide fire fighting equipment at appropriate places as stated in the brochure and also obtain a fit for occupancy certificate from the statutory authorities.
e) Secuirty system: The brochure states that security posts will be made available at suitable locations. We direct the opposite party to provide permanent security posts.
f) Telephone landline cables: Opposite party admitted in the counter that work was given to M/s.Ray Consultants and Contractors and they have stopped the work midway. We direct the opposite party to complete the execution of this work.
With respect to complainants claim of incinerator, since there is no such specific provision in the brochure, it is open to the complainant to make their own arrangements for disposal of garbage. With respect to antiskid ceramic tiles and plastering, the opposite party are directed to provide the facilities as mentioned in the brochure which is as follows:
SPEFICIATIONS Foundation & structure: R.C.C. Framed structure Walls :
Brick masonry with cement mortar Plastering :Luppam finish for all inside walls & sponge finish for all external walls.
Doors :Custom designed shutters for main door, Commerical flush shutters for inside doors Windows :Glazed aluminium powder coated windows with Safety grills.
Flooring :
Good quality ceramic tiles Toilets :
Anti skid ceramic tiles with ceramic tile dadoing Upto 2.1 M height & sanitary fixtures Kitchen :Polished Green Marble, stainless steel sink & wall Dadoing Painting :
Inside coloring with two coats of plastic emulsion.
External walls with cement based paint & joinery with enamel painting.
Electrical :
Concealed wiring with adequate points for T.V.
Telephone, Power Points & Provision for geyser in Toilets.
Lift :Ten passenger automatic door lift for each block.
Fire Firghting :
Provision for fire fighting equipment at appropriate Places and requisite norms Security system :
Security posts at suitable locations.
The High Power Committee submitted its final report on 20-10-2008 and in their final report concluded as follows:
a) The Committee inspected (54) flats in I & II inspections and 52 flats in final inspection i.e. total 106 flats. In 51 flats, rectifications were carried out by the agency under the supervision of beneficiaries and APHB engineers and subject to co-operation of beneficiaries the rectifications in balance 55 flats will be carried out to the satisfaction of the beneficiaries.
b) The flooring in the toilets are as per the specifications adopted in the agreement item No.25 of Project Specification (Appendix-3) and as per the decisions given by the Monitoring Committee and to that extent the Public were offered to visit the show unit in Gruhakalpa Complex for better understanding of the specification before issuing demand survey.
c) The flat wise details like nature of defects, suggested to rectifications to be attended by the construction agency are shown in annexure (2) enclosed.
d) The Committee has observed that no allottee has changed the bath room floor tiles as claim in the case provided by the A.P.Housing Board except in one or two flats for their convenience like vasthu. Any changes are not permitted as per clause 4(p) of Sale Deed.
With respect to other prayers of the complainant i.e. to provide modern club, school, hospital, commercial complex, the learned counsel for the opposite party has submitted that the work has been started and land has been allotted for some of these facilities as mentioned in his affidavit which is as follows:
a) School: With respect to school, the learned counsel for the opposite party contended that an extent of 7 acres was handed over to Srividya Niketan Education Trust and the plans were already approved by HUDA and it is functioning since 2006 academic year.
b) Hospital: An extent of 2 Acs. of land is allotted to NIMS for construction of hospital.
c) Shops: 10 temporary shops are provided on the temporary space in the stilt floor for grocery, tea, snacks, vegetables, pharmacy, dry cleaning, milk booth, men parlour etc. A sub Post Office is also functioning in the township. Ac.3.00 of land was handed over to M/s.Speck Systems in the middle of the township and shopping complex work was already started.
d) Club House:An extent of Ac.8.00 is allocated for club house and swimming pool and no bidder has come forward yet.
Keeping in view these submissions, we are of the view that since area has already been allotted and work is in progress, we direct the opposite party to provide all the facilities as stated in the brochure to be made available to the complainant within a period of six months. With respect to the complainants prayer of Maintenance, elections, inclusion of township in GHMC, senior citizens day care centre, maintenance of roads, parks, illumination and sanitation, burial ground etc. the complainant is directed to make a representation to the High Power Committee for their consideration since their claims do not all within the purview of jurisdiction of this Commission.
In the result this complaint is allowed directing opposite party to attend on the following:
Ducts:to conduct repair works on the leakages of ducts and the complainant is directed to co-operate with the opposite party and hand over one set of keys to the facilitator to enable them to attend to the repair works as and when necessary and the defects are to be rectified as stated by the High Power Committee report.
Water Tanks, gauges and ladders: Opposite party are directed to see that the ladders are fixed properly and also fix the water level gauges for each tank.
Lift: With respect to lift, the complainant is directed to submit its representation before the High Power Committee , which shall consider the matter.
Fire Fighting system: Opposite party are directed to provide fire fighting equipment at appropriate places as stated in the brochure and also obtain a fit for occupancy certificate from the statutory authorities.
Secuirty system: The brochure states that security posts will be made available at suitable locations. We direct the opposite party to provide permanent security posts.
Telephone landline cables: Opposite party admitted in the counter that work was given to M/s.Ray Consultants and Contractors and they have stopped the work midway. We direct the opposite party to complete the execution of work.
Plastering: Plastering, painting, electrical works, opposite party are directed to provide these facilities as per the specifications stated in the brochure and which are also aforementioned in the High Power Committee Report.
Common Corridors: The prayer of the complainant to lay ceramic tiles on the flooring of common corridors is dis-allowed since there is no specific mention in the brochure.
Maintenance: With respect to maintenance, since this Commission does not have jurisdiction to fix maintenance charges or to direct for payment of arrears, if any, it is open to the complainant to make a fresh representation to High Power Committee which may consider the report.
With respect to complainants claim of incinerator, since there is no such specific provision in the brochure, it is open to the complainant to make their own arrangements for disposal of garbage. With respect to the prayer of the complainant to provide modern facilities like school, hospital, club house, shops, commercial complex etc. opposite party are directed to provide these facilities as promised by them in the brochure within a period of six months. With respect to the complainants prayer of Maintenance, elections, inclusion of township in GHMC, senior citizens day care centre, maintenance of roads, parks, illumination and sanitation, burial ground etc. the complainant is directed to make a representation to the High Power Committee for their consideration. We also award a compensation of Rs.10,000/- to each of the members of the complainant association, who are members at the time of filing of the complaint for the mental agony suffered by them on account of the aforementioned deficiencies together with costs of Rs.10,000/-. Time for compliance six months.
PRESIDENT. LADY MEMBER.
JM Dt.11-2-2009 //APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE// Witnesses examined for Complainant: Opposite Party:
-Nil- -Nil-
Exhibits marked on behalf of the complainant:
Ex.A-Brochures of A.P.H.B. issued in 2003 & 2005.
Exs.A2 & A3-Advertisements of A.P.H.B. in the newspaper dt. 11-4-2003 and 20-3-2005.
Ex.A4-News item about visit of House Committee dated 9-11-2006.
Ex.A5-News item about dampness/health hazard.
Ex.A6-Representation of residents of A.P.H.B. requesting Vice Chairman to form a owners association dated 26-3-2007 and 30-8-2007.
Ex.A7-Registration Certificate of Residents Welfare Association along with Articles of the Society, dated 10-9-2007.
Ex.A8-Representation to Residents Welfare Association to A.P.H.B. on 16 issues dated 15-9-2007.
Ex.A9-Representation to Housing Minister on 16 issues/joint meeting with V.C. of A.P.H.B. dated 17-9-2007 and 12-11-2007.
Ex.A10-Reminder to APHB on 16 issues dated 7-11-2007.
Ex.A11-Invitation of Residents Welfare Association (RWAS for short) inviting Housing Minister & V.C. of APHB for General Body Meeting cum Joint Meeting with residents to resolve issues dt 19-11-2007.
Ex.A12-List of claims and claimants submitted by RWAS to V.C., A.P.H.B. on all issues dated 22-12-2007.
Ex.A13-Final notice dated 2/4/1/12008 for payment of Rs.95,00,000/-.
Ex.A14-Final notice for payment of Rs.99,22,000/- dated 2-1-2008.
Ex.A15-Resolution of RWS E.C. Members dated 01-12-2007.
Ex.A16-Resolution of RWS General Body Members dated 31-12-2007.
Ex.A17-Claims submitted by 97 residents requesting RWS to take up with APHB dated 30-11-2007 and 6-1-2008.
Ex.A18-Regd. Sale deed No.5158/05 dated 19-7-2005.
Ex.A19-Complainant letter to form an Association dated 26-3-2007.
Ex.A20-Letter from Officer on Special Duty APHB for conducting joint meeting on 29-1-08 to discuss maintenance problems dt 26-1-08.
Ex.A21-Minutes of meeting held on 29-1-2008.
Ex.A22-Letter of Officer on Special duty to depute two persons from petitioner association on 29-1-2008 to discuss maintenance problems dated 31-1-2008.
Ex.A23-APHB letter for enhancement of Maintenance charges dt 13-2-08.
Ex.A24-Letter by complainant objecting enhancement of maintenance charges dated 16-2-2008.
Ex.A25-Letter dt.22-2-2008 to refund the maintenance deposit amount.
Ex.A26-Letter of E.E., A.P.H.B. letter about water supply dt 11-3-2008.
Ex.A27-Reply letter by RWAS to APHB on water losses dated 13-3-2008.
Ex.A28-RWAS letter dated 20-3-2008 requesting information under RTA on 11 issues.
Ex.A29-RWAS letter dated 24-3-2008 to V.C., APHB on thefts etc. and copy submitted to Human Rights Commission.
Ex.A30-Petition before A.P.State Human Right Commission dt 27-3-2008.
Ex.A31-Receipt of RTA Act fee for Rs.10/-.
Ex.A32-List of residents prepared by the Association dated 3-4-2008.
Ex.A33-Letter offering voluntary services to maintenance monitoring committee dated 3-4-2008.
Ex.A34-Resolution of RWS Executive Body Members dated 1-4-2008.
Ex.A35-List of issues block-wise and flat wise submitted by the Residents to take up with APHB dated 3-4-2008.
Ex.A36-Resident Complainant for Rs.30,000/-.
Ex.A37-Pamphlet of Singapore Class Township Welfare Association Regd.21/2008 dated 4-4-2008.
Ex.A38-List of 139 complainants list filed before opposite party High Power Committee dated 14-6-2008.
Ex.A39-A.P.Govt. G.O.Rt.No.229 dated 15-9-2001.
Ex.A40-HUDA Technical permission for Development of Group Housing in Sy.No.2 and 10 of Pocharam dated 1-8-2002.
Ex.A41-HUDA Technical approval of building plans for Commercial complex in Sy.No.2 and 10 of Pocharam dated 28-12-2007.
Ex.A42-HUDA supply of information under RTA Act dt.8-12-2007 that Sanskruthi Township, HUDA has accorded only technical approval for the plans submitted by APHB under Building Regulations G.O.Ms.No.423 dated 31-7-1998.
Ex.A43-Dt.24-10-2007 HUDA supply of information along with statement.
Ex.A44-Dated 9-4-2008 of APHB supply of information under RTA Act Sanskruthi township, promised amenities are not provided till date.
Ex.A45-Letter dated 29-5-2007 of Additional Director of Fire & Emergency Services informing that the builder has not obtained NOC for occupancy from the Department.
Ex.A46-Dated 29-6-2004 from Director General of Fire & Emergency Services, supply of information under RTA Act Sanskruthi Township-Plans should be Multistoried Buildings Regulations, 1981 and NBC.
Ex.A47-Dated 14-12-2006 from Director General of Fire & Emergency Services supply of information under RTA Act, Sanskruthi Township and Memorandum to Honble A.P.High Court W.P.No.26365/2005 and inspection report dated 9-8-2006 short false.
Ex.A48-Notice for Violation of Fire Prevention and Fire Safety Measures dated 14-12-2006.
Ex.A49-Letter dated 29-5-2008 from complainant to opposite party pointing deficiencies while implementing the approved plans, development of amenities etc. provision for senior citizens, ladies, TTD temple, Kalyana Mandapam in future expansion.
Ex.A50-Complainant letter dated 9-6-2008 to Chief Minister to implement G.Os.
and brochure commitments to provide amenities.
Ex.A51-Complainant letter to V.C.HUDA and APHB to develop 5 parks dated 9-6-2008.
Ex.A52-Details of site plan of proposed development in S.No.2 and 10 of Pocharam belonging to APHB dated 31-7-2002.
Ex.A53-Permit No.3946/mp2/h/02 letter No.3964 dt.31-7-2002 Ex.A54-Huda technical approved vide letter no.3964.mp2/h/2002 dt.1-8- 02 Disallowed C& D blocks.
Ex.A55-Information by APHB under RTA Act dated 21-6-2008.
Ex.A56-Photos.
Ex.A57-HUDA Approval letter dated 1-8-2002.
Ex.A58-Resolution of Executive Committee dated 1-4-2008.
Ex.A59-Letter of Officer on Special Duty, A.P.H.B. dated 17-4-2008.
Ex.A60-Circular dated 25-4-2008 of other association.
Ex.A61-Reply submitted by APHB to Human Rights Commn. dt 30-4-08.
Ex.A62-Reply affidavit in HRC No.968/2008 dated 27-5-2008.
Ex.A63-Deficiencies in approval of plans dated 29-5-2008.
Ex.A64-Representation of Residents Welfare Association to Chief Minister dated 9-6-2008.
Ex.A65-Representation of Residents Welfare Association to V.C. HUDA and APHB dated 9-6-2008.
Ex.A66-FIR No.158/2008 of Ghatkesar Police Station dated 21-6-2008.
Ex.A67-Notice by OSD, APHB to Mr.M.Raghava Rao dated 20-6-2008.
Ex.A68-Reply of Mr.M.Raghava Rao to OSD notice dated 21-6-2008.
Ex.A69-Appeal by OSD, APHB to the residents dated 23-7-2008.
Ex.A70-CRL M.P.No.1051/08 in CR.No.158/08 dated 28-6-2008.
Ex.A71-Anticipatory Bail grant order in 158/08 dated 7-7-2008.
Ex.A72-Representation of Association to United Federation of Residents Welfare Association of Hyderabad dated 31-12-2007.
Exhibits marked on behalf of Opposite party:
Ex.B1-Printout of Website.
Ex.B2-Product catalogue issued by Astral-regarding PVC pipes.
Ex.B3-Notification dated 19-3-2005 issued by APHB.
Ex.B4-List of details for 84 complainants in C.C.No.4/2008.
Ex.B5-Quantity of water received/requirement per day at the township. Ex.B6-Report of High Power Committee dt.17-5-2008, 14-6-2008, 20-10- 2008 and 3-11-2008.
Ex.B7-Extract of contract agreement between APHB & M/s.CESMA dt.30- 1-2003.
Ex.B8-Sale deed dated 2-4-2008.
Ex.B9-Paper publication extract of Saakshi dt.17-4-08.
Ex.B10-Statement showing status of complainants in C.C.No.3/2008. Ex.B11-Status of claimants in C.C.No.4/208.
Ex.B12-List of details for 99 claimants in C.C.No.3/2008.
Ex.B13-List of details for 84 claimants in C.C.No.4/2008.
Ex.B14-Copy of complaint in HRC No.3736/08.
Ex.B15-Extract of register for rectification.
Ex.B16-Pamphlet dt.13-3-2008.
PRESIDENT. LADY MEMBER.
Dt.11-2-2009