Jana chaitanya frauds

Jana Chaitanya might have plundered > 1OOO Crs from Common People
===========
#1 Sai Keertana ,VISAKHAPATNAM
Realtors asked to repay amount
By B. Prabhakara Sarma
VISAKHAPATNAM: There were quite a few cases of real estate companies failing to fulfil their promise in recent times and the Visakhapatnam District Consumer Forum promptly directed them to repay the money collected from consumers with interest and compensation.
The forum recently gave direction to the Janachaitanya Housing Private Ltd., in several cases. A housewife in Santhinagar near NAD Kotha Road in the city, Boddeda Dhanalakshmi, had joined the Sai Keertana layout scheme of the company and had paid Rs. 60,900 in instalments. The scheme started in 1999 and she was promised 240 square yards in the layout. When it was not registered in her name, she filed a complaint (Consumer dispute No: 995/2003) against the Managing Director of Janachaitanya Housing Private Ltd., Madala Sudhakar, in Guntur, for refund, damages and costs. The opposite party contended that the consumer had paid only Rs. 60,900 out of the total sale consideration of Rs. 90,000 and therefore was a defaulter. But the forum president, P. Jagannadham Naidu, and its members, P.S.N. Rao and D. Suseela, observed that selling house-sites without obtaining the layout plan from the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority itself amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and directed the latter to repay the money paid by the consumer with 15 per cent interest from March 5 last year till the date of realisation along with Rs. 5,000 as compensation and Rs.1,000 towards cost of the proceedings.
In another case, S. Jomi Naidu, had joined the Sai Prahlad layout scheme of the company, which started in 1992. He paid Rs. 39,500 in instalments for acquiring a 200 sq. yd house site. When the site was not registered in his name, he filed a complaint (Consumer dispute No: 1252/2003) in the Forum against the MD as well as the branch manager of the company in Dasapalla Complex for refund with interest, damages and costs. Here again, the opposite parties filed a counter saying that the consumer had not paid the total consideration of Rs. 2 lakhs. The consumer had committed default and as per the terms and conditions of the scheme, the amount was to be forfeited and the membership terminated. The consumer had violated the contractual obligations and, therefore, the claim was not only unjust but also not maintainable, they argued while seeking dismissal of the case with costs.
The forum held that there was deficiency in service and gave a verdict in favour of the consumer directing the opposite parties to repay Rs. 39,500 with 15 per cent interest per annum from October 16 last year till the date of realisation, along with Rs. 5,000 as compensation and Rs. 1,000 as costs.
A similar direction was given for repayment of money with 15 per cent interest along with the same amount as compensation and costs was delivered in the case (Consumer Dispute No: 1219/2003) of a resident of P.R. Gardens in the Industrial post, Kamireddi Mangu Naidu, while in another half-a-dozen cases, the company was asked to repay the money with 15 per cent interest per annum along with Rs. 1,000 as costs for deficiency in service.