| Complaint Case No. CC/156/2017 | | ( Date of Filing : 06 Dec 2017 ) |
| | | | 1. Smt. Seuli Sarkar, Wife of Sri Kali Shankar Sarkar. | | Residing at Flat No. C, 4th Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar, Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kol- 700066, under ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. 1. M/S. Classic Construction Company. | | residing at 6 A, Ekbalpore Road, P.S.- Ekbalpore, Kolkata- 700023. | | 2. 2. Dilwar Hossain, S/O Sk. Jabed Ali. | | residing at 6A,Ekbalpore Road, P.S.- Ekbalpore, Kolkata- 700023. | | 3. 3. Feroz Ahmed, S/O Md. Noor Ahmed. | | residing at 6A,Ekbalpore Road, P.S.- Ekbalpore, Kolkata- 700023. | | 4. 4. Khurshed Ahmed, S/O Moktar Ahmed, | | residing at 6A,Ekbalpore Road, P.S.- Ekbalpore, Kolkata- 700023. | | 5. 5. Smt. Dipa Gupta Alias Gupta Sharma, Wife of Late Biman Gupta alias Gupta Sharma. | | residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 6. 6. Sri Susmit Gupta alias Gupta Sharma,S/O Late Biman Gupta, alias Gupta Sharma. | | residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 7. 7. Smt. Papiya Sarkar, Wife of Rudra Sarkar, and daughter of Late Biman Gupta Sharma. | | residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 8. 8. Smt. Gopa Gupta alias Gupta Sharma wife of Late Swadesh Ranjan Gupta alias Gupta Sharma. | | residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 9. 9. Sri Saikat Gupta alias Gupta Sharma S/O Late Swadesh Ranjan Gupta alias Gupta Sharma. | | residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 10. 10. Sri Sayan Gupta alias Gupta Sharma S/O Late Swadesh Ranjan Gupta alias Gupta Sharma. | | residing at residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 11. 11. Sri Bijan Kumar Gupta alias Gupta Sharma S/O Late Sudhindra Narayan Gupta Sharma. | | residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 12. 12. Sri Swaraj Krishna Gupta alias Gupta Sharma S/O Late Sudhindra Narayan Gupta Sharma. | | residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 13. 13.Smt. Sikha Gupta, Wife of Sri Sankar Gupta. | | residing at 1st Floor and 2nd Floor, Ashirbad Apartment, Bidhangarh Uttar,Mouza Panchur, Pargana Balia, P.S. Rabindra Nagarh, Kolkata- 700066 ward no. 9 of Maheshtala Municipality. | | 14. 14. Smt. Lekha Sengupta, Wife of Sri Amalesh Sengupta. | | presently residing at E1/6, 134/3, C.S. Mukherjee Road, Konnagar, Hooghly, Pin- 712235. |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | 07.... 31/05/2018... C.C 156 of 2017 Today is fixed for passing judgment exparte in the case and, therefore, the case record is taken up for consideration. This is a case filed by the complainant, praying for registration of the case flat and also for payment of compensation by the O.P nos. 1 to 4. Summons in the case have been refused by the O.Ps and, therefore, the case is heard exparte against them. The brief facts leading to the filing of the instant case by the complainant are that O.P-1 is a Partnership Firm ,carrying on business of construction of multi storied building and O.P nos. 2 to 4 are partners thereof . O.P nos. 5 to 14 are the land owners. One Development Agreement was effected by and between the land owners and the aforesaid developer on 1.3.2096 and in pursuance of that development agreement the developers i.e O.P nos. 1 to 4 raised a multi storied building upon the case land. Thereafter, the developers executed a sale agreement dated 5.3.2003 with the complainant along with the land owners and by virtue thereof the developers agreed to sell the case flat as succinctly described in schedule to the complaint for a total consideration p4rice of Rs.3,20,000/-. The entire consideration price was paid to the developers by the complainant on various dates. Possession of the flat was delivered to the complainant on 25.5.2004. But, the Sale Deed in respect of the said flat has not been registered in favour of the complainant by the O.Ps and ,therefore, the complainant has filed the instant case ,praying for registration and also for payment of compensation. Hence, this case. DECISION WITH REASONS It is tobe seen now whether the O.Ps are guilty of deficiency in service for not registering the subject flat in favour of the complainant. The complainant has filed evidence on affidavit. It is stated therein by the complainant that he has paid the entire consideration money to the developers . But the developers are yet to register the sale deed in respect of the case flat in favour of her. It is also stated by her in her evidence that she is in possession of the case flat. This evidence of the complainant has remained unrebuttted and taking this aspects into consideration we do say that the complainant has been able to establish that the Sale Deed has yet not been registered in favour of her in respect of the case flat by the developers. Inability of the developers to register the sale deed in favour of the complainant is a glaring example of deficiency in service on their part and this being so, the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for and the relief is awarded accordingly as under. Hence, ORDERED That the complaint case be and the same is allowed exparte against the O.Ps with cost of Rs. 10,000/-. All the O.Ps are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance with respect ot the subject flat in favour of the complainant and also to pay Rs.30,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony caused to the complainant by them, within a period of one month from the date of this order, failing which, the complainant is at liberty to get the sale deed executed and registered through the machinery of this Forum and also to recover the compensation amount as mentioned above with interest @9% p.a till full realization thereof. Let a free copy of this order be given to the parties concerned at once. President I / We agree Member Member Dictated and corrected by me President | |
