LEGAL PRACTICE COURSE

INTERNAL ASSESSMENT

Sudev Singh
Division B
B.A. LLB
17010125169
ABC Ltd.

1. Why were the ECS panic button and intercom system in the flat which were part of
the agreement still not installed, despite being brought to the attention of ABC Ltd. to
this day? Is it a problem of unavailability from the vendor or due to a lack of interest
on the part of ABC?

2. What was the reason behind not fixing the water leakage problem in the flat after
receiving a complaint from the Sharmas, when maintenance charges were duly being
paid?

3. What is included in services and upkeep under the definition of maintenance for
which Rs. 10,000 in the form of monthly charges are levied upon residents?

4. How much compensation would be an agreeable compromise that the company is

willing to pay for causing the elderly couple to move out and stay in a different flat at
added expense?

5. Why were there no attempts made from December 2017 up to April 2019 to follow up
upon the installation of essential agreed services such as the ECS panic button which
are used to signal an emergency?

6. What are the terms and conditions relating to maintenance charges, are they
mandatory in nature or can payment be ceased upon failure to maintain?

7. Who stands liable to pay damages, ABC Ltd. Or ABC Maintenance LLP?
 8. Whose responsibility was it to follow up and ensure that amends were made, and who
shall be responsible for carrying out repairs from now onwards, ABC Ltd. Or ABC
Maintenance LLP?

9. Did ABC Ltd. Conduct the necessary follow-ups and do due diligence when receiving
the complaints?

10. What would ABC Ltd. Propose as a compromise in order to rectify the situation and
what are their points of concern?

Sharmas

1. What range of compensation would the Sharmas be comfortable to negotiate

receiving for the expense and personal trouble of shifting to a rented place in
Bangalore despite having spent their entire savings on the flat by ABC Ltd who were
deficient in providing services that were agreed upon?

2. Would they like to implead ABC LLP in order to fulfill demands (iii) and (iv) related
to electricity and water alongside demands for damages, as the former is essential to
the space being habitable?

3. What compromises are they willing to make in terms of the demanded Rs. 5,00,000 in
damages considering that even though there was deficiency of service, the Sharmas
 should have approached the court rather than stopping payment of maintenance
charges?

4. How important were the facilities of ECS and intercom that were deficient in service
to the Sharmas; were they included in the ambit of special services conducive to
elderly residents which made them choose this specific facility?

5. Did the Sharmas go through an agent or broker to procure the flat in question? How
was it allowed to remain unfinished at the time of moving in?

6. Did the Sharmas engage in any follow-up to their complaints and if so what was the
frequency and what response did they receive?

7. Was there an inspection conducted by either the Sharmas or a third party of the flat,
and if so why were the irregularities not pointed out at the start?

8. Do the Sharmas possess receipts or any records of the complaints lodged regarding
the ECS and intercom system as well as water leakage?

9. Why was the complaint not filed earlier at the time when the water leakage problem
was supposedly ignored, and why did they take the decision to instead stop paying
maintenance charges?
 10. What outcome would be feasible to them as an amicable compromise that avoids
going to litigation?

Solutions

ABC fulfills correction of the first two deficiencies in service i.e. installing ECS and intercom
and fixing water leakage within the stipulated 2 months, while the Sharmas in turn pay
outstanding maintenance charges without interest. No additional compensation is granted.

ABC waives the outstanding maintenance charges and attached interest, while fixing
deficiencies in service within the stipulated time period. The Sharmas do not litigate and
defame the company’s name, and resume payment of maintenance fees hereon after while not
asking for damages.

ABC fixes deficiencies in service within the stipulated time, and are paid the outstanding
maintenance charges excluding interest amounting to Rs. 1,50,000 by the Sharmas. The
company must however remit damages amounting to Rs. 5,00,000 or any other agreeable sum
to the Sharmas for the personal trouble and hardship the elderly couple were put through to
find a rented flat, despite having already spent all their savings on a flat by ABC Ltd.