DKD CDRForum - ADALAT SESSION on 23rd February 2011.

Present from our side: Mr.Anand Rao, Mr.Prabodh C. Bolur, Mr.Rajesh Shenoy, Mr.Manish Dugar, Mr.Thalithaya, Ms Manjula advt.

Present from OP: Mr.Ganesh Shetty, (Builder) Mr.Dayanand Rai Advt.

Preamble: DKD-CDR Forum's judgment dated 15-10-2009 confirmed wrong-doings of the builder. This judgment has been confirmed by the KS-CDRCommission at Bangalore as "JUST and PROPER" and builder's appeal at National Commission has been dismissed at the admission stage and confirmed that "the compensation granted is proper and flat owners have been harassed for over number of years." Hence builder should accept the judgment gracefully or he must face the consequences for not adhering to the judgment. Builder never approached us for any concession before this date.

Issues discussed with Hon. Judge Smt. Asha Shetty & two other Forum Members at DKDCDRForum.

  • Hon. Judge Smt. Asha Shetty was in chair, moderating the discussion. She asked about the progress in our effort.

  • Builder said he had painted the building, Obtained Door number and Car-park marked & allotted.

  • We informed that painting is incomplete as half the side of external walls are not painted. When he disputed that earlier two coates of paint were given. We produced commissioner's report indicating that painting of only one coat of primer and one coat of paint was applied.

  • We understand from MCC, that temporary door number with heavy penalty is provided to the builder which not even shown to us. We need permanent door number with out penalty.

  • Builder said that most of the buildings are not given door number. Judge said she knew that number of building were given door numbers. Obtaining door number is builders responsibility.

  • We agreed that car parks are marked, but 40 car parks are alloted. We insisted that only 36 car parks are permitted. Judge wanted it to confirm to the approved drawing.

  • We informed the judge that we do not want any illegal things in our building which may become problematic for us in future.

  • Builder's lawyer informed that he has been paying electricity bills totaling Rs.10 lakhs. We produced our calculation for delayed delivery, excess amount with interest and compensation with interest. This works out to Rs 52 lakhs. This must be sorted out.

  • Builder's lawyer said they have entrusted the work of DOD to our lawyer Mr.Kini. And wanted him to be present. We said that complete basic data about the flat owners should be compiled by the builder with acceptable drawings of car park then only DOD work can progress.

  • We informed that LT electric meter should be in our name instead of HT meter in Builder's name. Builder informed that he already applied for LT meter connection and paid the fees also. It seems builder is not following up with MESCOM.

  • Judge said builder has to complete the unfinished work and read out the points of judgment and asked how much time is required. Builder asked for 2 more months time. Judge will review the progress on 23th March 2011.
"If our co-operative efforts fail, who benefits?
Think it over, please.
Do not allow it to fail."

HOME Check List for
buyers of new flat
Deed of Declaration Excerpts from
SC judgment
SC Judgment
on car park
HC judgment
on carpark
Car park
can not be sold.
Car Park - Types Terrace SC Judgment
1782 of 2009
SC Judgment
3302 of 2005
SC Judgment
12984 of 1996
Excerpts from
Overview of
Problems at APEKSHA
Construction Deficiency at APEKSHA Car-Park at
Reality Check Summary of
Judgment of
MCC documents.
TIME LINE Usefull links News Reports
involving builders
News Reports about
Akrama Sakrama
About us Diwali
Celebration 2010
Celebration 2009
New year celebration
on 31-12-2008
Celebration 2009
List of