DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR,
KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. __73_ _ OF ___2018
DATE OF FILING :25.6.2018 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: 8.2.2019
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Subrata Sarker & Jhunu Prasad
COMPLAINANT : 1. Smt. Saborni Acharya, wife of Shri Arindam Acharya of Flat no.2A, Deeplekha Apartment, no.129, Shyamnagar Road, Kolkata – 55.
2. Shri Arindam Acharya, so nof Asesh Acharya of Flat no.2A, Deeplekha Apartment, no.129, Shyamnagar Road, Kolkata – 55.
O.P/O.Ps : 1. M/s Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, at premises no.GF-12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata-107, 1st floor (Near Hotel Gateway), P.S Kasba, Dist. South 24-Parganas.
2. Mr. Biswanath Mondal, son of not known, Chairman cum Managing Director and Authorised Signatory of M/s Greenhaven Realty Private Limited.
a) M/s Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, at premises no.GF-12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata-107, 1st floor (Near Hotel Gateway), P.S Kasba, Dist. South 24-Parganas
b) Residing at Village- Purba Goyalbati Kheyadaha, Sonarpur, South 24-Parganas, Kolkata-743369.
3. Mrs. Ira Mondal, wife of not known, Director of M/s Greenhaven Realty Private Limited.
a) M/s Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, at premises no.GF-12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata-107, 1st floor (Near Hotel Gateway), P.S Kasba, Dist. South 24-Parganas
b) Residing at Village- Purba Goyalbati Kheyadaha, Sonarpur, South 24-Parganas, Kolkata-743369
4. Mr. Sudipta Kumar Ghosh, son of not known , director of M/s Greenhaven Private Limited.
a) M/s Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, at premises no.GF-12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, Kolkata-107, 1st floor (Near Hotel Gateway), P.S Kasba, Dist. South 24-Parganas
b) Residing at premises no.C-181, Baisakhi Abasan Block AG, Salt Lake, Kolkata-91.
5. Smt. Paroma Mukherjee (Pathak), wife of Shri Sumit Mukherjee of 66/1, North Jessore Road, P.O & P.S Barasat, North 24-Parganas, Pin-700124.
6. Shri Sukumar Roy, Director of M/s Greenhaven Realty Private Limited at premises no.GF-12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road,(1st floor), Kolkata-107, P.S Kasba.
__________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
The facts leading to the filing of the instant case under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 goes in its narrow compass as follows.
The complainants decided to purchase a developed plot of land in the dream project of O.p-1. O.P-1 is a company doing business of developing land etc. O.P nos. 2,3,4,5 and 6 are all directors of O.p-1. Complainants paid Rs.3,09,776/- to the O.P company as consideration price out of total consideration price of Rs.3,40,000/-. Last payment was made by them to the O.Ps on 3.7.2014. A plot measuring 2 cattahs ,as succinctly described in schedule to the complaint, was allotted to the complainants by the O.Ps. In September 2014, the O.Ps floated a new proposal that they would provide a Bungalow upon the said plot of land and, therefore, demanded more consideration price from the complainants. Complainants refused to accept to such proposal of the O.Ps and demanded refund of the consideration price paid by them. Since then, the O.Ps have not delivered the possession of the land to the complainant ,nor have they refunded the consideration price received by them. Therefore, the complainants have filed the instant case ,alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps for refund of the consideration price paid by them and also for compensation from the O.Ps. Hence, the case.
O.P nos.4,5,6 i.e the Directors of the company have not entered into appearance inspite of service of summons upon them vide postal track report kept in the record. So, the case is heard exparte against them.
The O.P nos. 1,2 and 3 have been contesting the case by filing written statement, wherein it is contended inter alia that the complainants wanted to buy the lands for gaining profit by way of sale in future at higher market price. The case is, therefore, not maintainable in law. The project was abandoned for public agitation which is beyond their control. There is no deliberate laches on their part; there is no cause of action arisen for bringing this case and, therefore, the case should be dismissed in limini.
Upon the averments of the parties, the following points are formulated for consideration.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
- Are the O.Ps guilty of deficiency in service as alleged by the complainants ?
- Are the complainants entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for ?
EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES
Evidence on affidavit is filed by the complainant. Written statement filed by the contesting O.Ps is treated as their evidence vide their petition dated 11.10.2018. BNAs filed by the parties are kept in the record after consideration.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no.1 & 2 :
It has been raised in the written statement filed by the contesting O.Ps that the complainants invested money with a view to gaining more profit by selling the land at higher market price in future. This is nothing but a mere averment and a mere averment does not ip so facto prove a fact. There is no evidence furnished by the O.Ps to prove this fact and, therefore, we feel no hesitation to say that the above plea as taken by the O.Ps is nothing but a subterfuge to avoid their liability.
It is the version of the O.Ps that they were compelled to abandon the project for the reason of public agitation and that they have no laches in closing the project. No evidence whatsoever has been placed on record by them to prove that there was public agitation and that the O.Ps were ,therefore, compelled to close their project due to such public agitation. Haad there been any public agitation, the O.Ps could have lodged the FIR before the Police ; they could have sought for assistance of the police in case of such disturbance ,but not a single document has been filed by the O.Ps in support of their contention. Regards being had to these aspects ,we do hold that there was no public agitation and the question of abandoning the project by the O.Ps does not arise. The O.Ps closed the project out of their own will and it is nothing but an unfair trade practice. Many people have indulged in such kind of trade practice to squeeze money from the public. According to them, it is a find way of squeezing money from the public. The O.Ps have indulged in such a foul game and the purpose is nothing but to squeeze money from the innocent purchasers.
It is not disputed by the O.Ps that they have received money from the complainants for selling a land to them. It also stands established by the materials on record that the project was abandoned by the O.Ps out of their sweet will. Abandonment of project after collecting money from the purchaser and unwillingness to refund the said money to those purchasers is a glaring instance of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service as well. Complainants are entitled to refund of the money paid by them with compensation to be paid by way of interest.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.P nos. 1,2 and 3 with cost of Rs.10,000/- and exparte against the O.P nos. 4,5 and 6 .
The O.Ps, who shall remain jointly and severally liable for payment to the complainants, are directed to refund Rs.3,09,776/- to the complainants with interest @12% p.a from the date of last payment to the O.Ps i.e 3.7.2014 till full realization thereof, within a month of this order, failing which the complainants are at liberty to recover the said amounts by execution of this award through the process of the Forum.
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
