DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR,
KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. __19_ _ OF ___2015
DATE OF FILING :29.1.2015 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: 16.8.2018
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Subrata Sarker & Jhunu Prasad
COMPLAINANT : 1. Dilip Kumar Ghosh, son of late Mohan lal Ghosh
2. Smt. Chaya Ghosh, wife of Sri Dilip Kumar Ghosh
At Flat no.B, 3rd Floor, 1, Gobinda Bose Lane, P.S Kalighat,
Kolkata – 25.
O.P/O.Ps : 1. M/s Mukherjee & Associates, at 8, Camac Street, Room no.2, Kolkata – 17, P.S Park Street, represented by
1a) Smt. Bithi Mukherjee, wife of late Mrinal Mukherjee
1b) Smt. Atreyee Banerjee, daughter of late Mrinal Mukherjee
Both of 262, Jodhpur Park, P.S Lake, Kolkata – 68.
2. Smt. Sayamik Bhattacharjee, wife of late Amarnath Bhattacharjee
3. Sri Sayantanu Bhattacharjee, s/o late Amarnath Bhattacharjee
Both of 1/1, Gobinda Bose Lane, Kolkata-25, P.S Kalighat.
4. Smt. Tanushree Bhattacharjee, d/o late Upendra Nath Bhattacharjee
5. Smt. Jayshree Chakraborty, d/o late Upendra Nath Bhattacharjee
6. Smt. Samita Mukherjee, d/o late Upendra Nath Bhattacharjee
4 to6 are residing at 1, Gobinda Bose Lane, Kolkata-25, P.S Kalighat
7. Smt. Chitra Chakraborty,wife of late Sudip Kr. Chakraborty, daughter of late Bhabani Nath Bhattacharjee of 1/1, Gobinda Bose Lane, Kolkata-25, P.S Kalighat
8. Smt. Sipra Roy, wife of Sri Asish Kr. Roy, D/o late Bhabani Nath Bhattacharjee of 148/3J, Swinhoe Lane, P.S Kasba, Kolkata -39.
9. Smt. Krishna Chakraborty, wife of Bijen Chakraborty ,daughter of late Bhabani Nath Bhattacharjee of 1, Gobinda Bose Lane, Kolkata-25, P.S Kalighat
10. Smt. Suvra Chakraborty,wife of Sri Ashok Chakraborty,D/o late Bhabani Nath Bhattacharjee of 1/1, Gobinda Bose Lane, Kolkata-25, P.S Kalighat
11. Miss Sukla Bhattacharjee, D/o Bhabani Nath Bhattacharjee of 1/1, Gobinda Bose Lane, Kolkata-25, P.S Bhawanipur.
_______________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
The facts, as it stand in the amended version of the complaint, may be epitomized as follows.
O.P-1 is a Firm and late Mrinal Mukherjee ,the predecessor in interest of O.P nos.1a and 1b was the Proprietor thereof and the Firm conducted the business of development of land with construction of building thereon. O.P nos. 2 to 11 are the land owners. A Sale Agreement dated 24.10.1997 was executed by and between the complainant and the deceased developer i.e Mrinal Mukherjee and thereby the said developer agreed to sell a self contained flat as succinctly described in Schedule to the complaint for a total consideration price of Rs.8,50,000/-. The complainant paid the total consideration price to the developer on different dates. Possession of the subject flat was also delivered to the complainant on 11.8.2004.
Another sale agreement dated 30.6.2010 was also executed by and between the complainants and the aforesaid developers and thereby the said developers agreed to sell a covered car parking space for Rs.51,000/- to the complainants. The entire consideration price of Rs.51000/- was also paid to the developer by the complainant and the possession of car parking space was also delivered to the complainants on 30.6.2010. But no registration of the flat and also the car parking space has been made by the developer in favour of the complainants. Repeated requests by the complainants for registration of the flat and car parking space ended in fiasco. So, the instant case is filed by the complainant ,praying for registration , completion certificate, demarcation of car parking space and compensation etc. Hence, the case.
Written version of statement is filed by O.P nos. 2 to 11 i.e the land owners. According to them, no agreement was executed by them in favour of the complainants, nor did they promise any service to the complainants; they are not the service providers of the complainant and, therefore, question of any deficiency in service on their part does never arise. The case should be dismissed in limini with cost.
Written statement is filed by the O.P nos.1a and 1b i.e the legal heirs of deceased developer namely Mrinal Mukherjee . According to them, Mrinal Mukherjee died on 26.11.2011 and these O.Ps are housewives. They have no idea or knowledge about the business of their predecessors. They are not at all privy to any agreement of the complainant ,nor did they receive any consideration price from the complainant. They have no objection to register the deed of conveyance ,if so directed by the Forum. But , they are , as goes their submission, unable to arrange for completion certificate from KMC and to pay any charge thereof.
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 ON AFFIDAVIT
Petition of complaint is treated as evidence of the complainant vide their petition dated 19.6.2017. Evidence on affidavit is filed by the O.Ps. Questionnaire, reply and BNA filed herein are kept in the record after consideration.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no.1 :
In the instant case it has been stated by the complainants on evidence that they have paid the entire consideration money to the erstwhile developer i.e Mrinal Mukherjee and the said developer has also delivered possession of the flat and car parking space to the complainants. That entire consideration price is paid by the complainants to the erstwhile developer is also established from a letter dated 11.8.2004 given to the complainants by the said developers vide Annexure “C” to the complaint.
The only grievance of the complainant is that the registration of the flat and car parking space has not been effected in their favour by the erstwhile developer and also by the present developers inspite of their repeated requests to that effect. The legal heirs of erstwhile developers have stated in the written version of their statement that they have no objection to the registration ofg the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants in respect of the flat and car parking space.
The land owners i.e O.P nos. 2 to 11 have also no objection to such registration of the flat and car parking space in favour of the complainants.
Regards being had to all these facts and circumstances we feel no difficulty whatsoever to say that the complainants are entitled to get the deed of conveyance executed and registered by the O.Ps in respect of the flat and car parking spaces. Further, it has also been prayed by the complainants in their complaint that an order for demarcation of the car parking space be also issued in their favour. It is established fact that the car parking space has not been demarcated and this being so, the complainant is also entitled to get an order in this respect.
The complainants have also prayed for compensation for mental agony and harassment. On perusal of the record and the materials placed on it, it is found that delay has entered into the sole of the complainants. One letter dated 15.9.2014 ( Annexure F) to the complaint is filed herein and by this letter the complainants first requested the developers to execute and register a sale deed in favour of them in respect of the flat and car parking space. This letter was given on after delivery of possession of the flat to the complainant. The question is why the complainants went in slumber for long 10 years. Why did they not take any step for registration of the flat in their favour? There is no explanation furnished by the complainants for such inordinate delay and regards being had to this very fact, we do say that the complainants have dug the pit in themselves in so far as the registration of the flat is concerned and, therefore, their arises no question of harassment and mental agony suffered by the complainants. This being so, the complainants are deemed to be not entitled to compensation for delay in registration from the O.Ps.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.Ps with a cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the O.P nos.1a and 1b to the complainants.
All the O.Ps are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the subject flat and car parking space in favour of the complainants and also to make a demarcation of the car parking space within a month of this order. They are also restrained from transferring or alienating the roof of the premises to any third party or any stranger and also from causing any disturbance in the peaceful possession of the subject flat described in schedule to the complaint.
O.P nos. 1a and 1b are also directed to hand over completion certificate of the subject building to the complainants within a month of this order ,failing which, the complainant are at liberty to execute this order through the instrumentality 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
