To

Sri Radhanandan
Advocate
B S Radhanandan and Associates,
Advocates and Solicitors,
No 239/1, 1st floor, 4th main
Chamarajpet, Bengaluru-18.

Sir

The notice issued to Sri Parthasarathyraju S/o late Narasaraju on

behalf of your client M/S Perfecta Life style, represented by its authorised
signatory, is placed in my hands to issue this reply with instructions as
hereunder:

1. Our client instructs us that our client denies each and every allegations
made in the notice under reply. It seems that your client has not
instructed you properly, he has suppressed vital information from you.

2. Your client is aware the property given for development is located in

posha locality and it is of a good value. It is estimated that the net worth
of the property as on the date of the agreement is Rs 75,00,00,000/-
approximately. Your client is aware that the property in question had the
potential to be a landmark project in the Commercial Street area but due
to lack of professional approach and to make unjust enrichment at the
cost of our client, your client had damaged the very project and put our
client in heavy lose. Our client is put to irreparable loss and injury due to
your client’s callous attitude.

3. Our client further instructs us that it was understood by your client that
the property is in ideal locality and with an intention to develop the
property into a commercial one, a JD was entered into between the
parties. It was represented by your client that he has all the expertise in
the field of real estate and development of the property. It was agreed
that the building consisting of retail spaces and offices were proposed to
be constructed on the property. Along with this car parking facility was
also proposed to be constructed. Since the plan was sanctioned prior to
the agreement by our client, your client was permitted to put up
construction of the property without there being any delay. The expenses
in this regard was paid by our client which was promised by your client to
repay the same. It was assured by your client that the expenses towards
the sanctioning of the plan would be reimbursed by your client to a tune
of Rs 22,28,725/-. Till date your client has not reimbursed this portion of
the amount. To this amount our client is entitled with interest. That apart
our client had also got the plan modified and at the requests of your
client, an additional sum was spent by our client to a tune of Rs
4,68,500/-. This amount is also not reimbursed. Totalling to Rs
26,97,225/-

4. Our client further instructs us that your client had assured the building
would be as per the specification mentioned in the course of the
agreement. To the shock and dismay to our client, the construction of the
building is not as per the specification. Every part of the construction is
leaking and even after repeated intimation, the said defect is not cured.
The ceiling is leaking and corner is leaking. All toilets have leakage. This
aspect was brought to the knowledge of your client. It was promised that
he would rectify the same but till date the same is persisting and no
action is initiated by your client to rectify the same. This has resulted in
heavy loss to our client which your client need to compensate.

5. Our client further instructs us that since the agreement stipulates that
the developer’s share is subject to fulfil of the terms and conditions
mentioned therein, it cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Our client
instructs us that the word “OWNER’S CONSTRUCTED AREA” is understood
as defect free and not otherwise. This portion of land which is said as
OWNER’S CONSTRUCTED AREA is not defect free as stated supra. The
building is not complete, in its sense. Hence your client is not entitled to
refundable deposit in its entirety. The expenses towards the defects
needs to be worked out and the accounts needs to be struck without
which your client is not entitled for the refundable amount. The amount
of Rs 50 lakhs is paid to your client on an understanding. A mutually
agreeable expert can be appointed in this regard to ascertain the defect/s.
The payment of interest as claimed is not feasible.

6. Our client instructs us that he is entitled to sell his portion of the land
since he is the owner of the same. It would be further relevant to state
that your client never intimated in writing about the completion of the
building. Many intimations were sent to your client in this regard.

7. Our client further instructs us that as per clause 11.2, your client was
suppose to complete the construction and deliver the possession to our
client within 36 months with a grace period of 6 months. In this regard it
is brought to your client’s knowledge the agreement is entered into on
7.8.2013, the building should have been completed with in February 2017.
In default of non completion your client is required to pay a sum of Rs 30
per sq ft of the super built up area of the OWNER’S CONSTRUCTED AREA
for every month.
A sum of Rs 2,10,17,880/- is due from your client. A property of huge
potential should have been put to maximum use. Here also our client has
suffered loss.

8. A huge sums of money is already paid to your client towards

maintenance. Except a paltry amount no amount is due. The remaining
amount would be paid to your client. The question of the paying the
interest on the delayed payment of refundable deposit does arise owning
to your client’s unprofessional attitude also for the reason the building is
not complete.

9. Your client is aware that a portion of land to an extent of 1357.5 sq ft

did not form the part of JD. It was subsequently handed over to him. It
was understood between the parties that the amount equivalent to the
amount mentioned in the JD as non refundable deposit would be
deducted as non refundable amount from out of refundable amount in the
JD to this portion of land. Your client is enjoying the same proceeds from
this portion of the land also. In this regard, your client need to pay a sum
of Rs Refundable Rs. 35,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Five Lakhs Only) , Non-
Refundable Rs. 35,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty- Five Lakhs Only)

10. Our client instructs us to state that some of the short falls are listed
below:
a. Retail markets as per standards require substantial interior works in
order to serve its intended purpose. You have barely done interior work
except the false ceilings and basic coat of paint. Kindly certify the quality,
materials and standards that have been used/attained
b. CC (Commencement Certificate)
c. OC (Occupancy Certificate)
d. Fire Safety and Readiness (Certification from concerned authority)
e. Air Conditioning and Ventilation Health Certificate
f. Water and Sewerage Board Approvals.
g. Electricity Department Approvals. Etc.

To summarise the above the following calculation is furnished for easy

reference.
a. Towards plan sanction and modification Rs 26,97,225/-
b. Rent for delay in completion Rs 2,10,17,880/-
c. Miscellaneous expenses towards OC and Cc Rs 02,50,000/-
d. Assessment and sub numbers Rs 07,50,000/-
e. Other Expenses incidental RS 02,50,000/-

Total Rs 2,49,65,105/-
11. Your client is not entitled for the amount claimed in the notice under
reply. Our client is not agreeable to the name proposed for the
arbitration.
 Should your client rush to court of law, our client shall defend the
same at your client’s risk and costs.

ADVOCATE