Smt. Sangita Paul, Member

This is a case filed by Smt. Sneha Basu, D/o. Late Snahangshu Narayan Basu of Street No.11, Quarter No.15/A, P.S. & P.O. – Chittaranjan, District – Burdwan, Pin – 713 331 and Smt. Reshmi Basu, D/o. Late Snehangshu Narayan Basu of IG-43, Sector-56, Noida, Pin – 201 310 against M/S. Shree Ramkrishna Enterprises, Sri Madhusudan Singha, Sri Chanchal Ganguly, Smt. Seema Gupta, Smt. Sharmistha Moitra, Sri Saikat Mukherjee, Smt. Reba Mukherjee, Shri Malay Mukherjee and Smt. Krishna Sanyal with a prayer to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the complainants in compliance with the contents of agreement for sale dated 13.03.2016 failing which the Deed of Conveyance be registered through the machinery of the Commission, in accordance with the law, to impose direction upon the OPs to complete the work of construction, as specifically stated in the agreement dated 13.03.2016 without further delay and to hand over the keys of the flat and to deliver vacant possession along with possession certificate, to provide completion certificate to the complainants to pass an order directing the OPs to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-, only towards compensation for harassment, mental agony and to pay Rs.50,000/- as litigation cost.

OP No.1 is M/S Shree Ramkrishna Enterprises.  It is a partnership firm.  The address is Boral Sarani, P.O. – Boral, P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata-700 154, District – South 24 Parganas.  The administrative office is at 472, Garia Main Road, Annapurna Hall, 1^st Floor, Kolkata-700 084.

OP No.2 is Shri Madhusudan Singha, S/o. Late Profulla Kumar Singha.  The address is Boral Sarani, P.O. – Boral, P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata-700 154, Dist. – South 24 Parganas.

OP No.3 is Shri Chanchal Ganguly, S/o. Late Suhrid Ganguly.  The address is 92, Kanungo Park, Ahana Apartment, Flat No.8, Garia, Kolkata-700 084.

OP No.4 is Smt. Seema Gupta, W/o. Late Onkar Nath Gupta.  The address is Boral Sarani, P.O. – Boral, P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata-700 154, District – South 24 Parganas.

OP No.5 is Smt. Sharmistha Moitra, W/o. Anirban Moitra, and D/o. Late Amal Kumar Mukhopadhyay.  The address is Sarat Pally, Minar Rathbari, Sabji Market, P.O. – Malda Police Station, English Bazar, District – Malda, Pin – 732 101.

OP No.6 Is Sri Saikat Mukherjee.  He is the son of Late Arun Mukherjee.

OP No.7 is Smt. Reba Mukherjee.  She is the wife of Late Arun Mukherjee.

OPs 6 and 7 are the residents of Flat No. C-2, 2^nd Floor, City King Complex, Dakshin Para, Natun Hut, Near Boral Student’s Club, P.O. – Boral, P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata-700 154, Dist. – South 24 Parganas.

OP No.8 is Shri Malay Mukherjee.  He is the son of Late Sudhamay Mukherjee.  The Address is Boral Sarani, P.O. – Boral, P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata-700 154, District – South 24 Parganas.

OP No.9 is Smt. Krishna Sanyal.  W/o. Sri Pradip Sanyal.  The address is 87B, Cossipore Road, Block-“L”, Flat No.20, Kolkata-700 020.

The complainant, by filing this case states that the complainants were desirous of purchasing a flat and a car parking space, the OPs 2, 3 and 4 approached the complainant.  The complainant came to know that the said property was enjoyed by the legal heirs of Nagendranath Mukhopadhyay.  Later Amal Kumar Mukhopadhyay is the only alive legal heir of the said property, because other owners died as bachelors and spinsters.

OPs 5-9 decided to develop the said property and construct a multi-storeyed building.  The OPs 5-9 entered into an agreement with OPs 1-4 on 21.06.2014. The OPs 5-9 executed a general power of attorney on 21.06.2014 to the OPs 1-4.  The said power of attorney was registered.  The complainants agreed to purchase a self content residential flat measuring more or less 1030 Sq.ft. super built up area containing three bed rooms, one drawing cum dining, one kitchen, one balcony, one W.C., one toilet cum bath on the 3^rd floor, South East side, Flat No-C-3 of the G+4 storeyed building along with car parking space.

The total consideration price was Rs.28,93,450/-, the complainants paid a total sum of Rs.26,10,655/-.  The details of the payment was stated in the agreement for sale dated 18.03.2016.  The balance amount was paid through EMI. 

The OPs 1-4 did not register the Deed of Conveyance.  The complainants issued a legal notice on 13.03.2016.  Another notice was served on 01.09.2020.   That the cause of action started on 16.09.2020 i.e. the date of expiry of the notice and the same is continuing day by day. 

Hence, the complainant prays for passing an order imposing direction upon the OPs to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants, to complete the work of construction as specifically stated in the agreement dated 13.03.2016, to hand over the keys and delivery of vacant possession of the schedule C property, to provide completion certificate to the complainants, to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for harassment, mental agony, to pay litigation cost of Rs.50,000/- only.

OPs 1-4 in the written version states that they deny the allegation made in the complaint petition.  They state that the complaint is not maintainable in law and facts as well.  The complainant has suppressed the materials facts.  The said complaint is vexatious and speculative.

That the complaint does not come within the purview of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. 

The complaint is hopelessly barred by the law of limitation. 

The agreement for sale was executed in 13.03.2016 and the complaint is filed in 2020.  The OP completed the construction work in 2018 and delivered possession to the purchasers and land owners.  OP No.5 did not provide fresh power of attorney in favour of the developer.  As a result, the process of registration in favour of all the developers were delayed.  Due to absence of fresh power of attorney the work of installation of lift was pending.  

The OPs 1-4 did not receive full consideration amount from the complainant.  10% of the total amount of consideration was due.  Complainant is unable to pay the amount.  OPs 1-4 states that due to non-cooperation of OP No.5 OPs 1-4 cannot arrange completion certificate, install lift and execute deed of conveyance in favour of the purchasers.

OPs 1-4 prays for dismissal of the complaint petition. 

The OPs 6, 7, 8 in their written version denied and disputed the complainant’s petition.

The complainants entered into an agreement for sale dated 13.03.2016 with the developer mainly OPs 1-4 to purchase the flat.  The complainants took physical possession of the flat from the OPs 1-4.  The OPs 6, 7, 8 have no deliberate latches.  The OPs 6, 7 8 are ready to execute and register the sale deed in favor of the complainants in respect of the said flat.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPS 6, 7, 8.

The grievances alleged by the complainants are only be redressed by the developers i.e. OPs 1-4. 

OP No.9 in the W/V states that OP No.9 is the co-owner of the schedule-A property of the complaint petition.  They entered into an agreement with the OPs 1-4 on 21.06.2014.  OP No.9 is in the physical possession of her respective allocations. 

OP No.9 states that she has no deliberate latches on her part.  OP No.9 is willing to execute and register the sell deed in favour of the complainants, being the proposed purchasers therein.  In respect of the said flat as and when the same is directed by the Hon’ble Commission.  The incomplete work is to be carried out by the OPs 1-4. 

The grievances of the complainants can only be redressed by the developers 1-4.

The case was filed on 11.11.2020.  The instant case was admitted on 22.12.2020.  On 02.03.2021, Ld. Lawyer of the OPs 1-4 files W/V and Lawyer of the OPs 6,7, 8 files W/V.  On 26.03.2021, OP No.9 files W/V.  On 01.10.2021, Ld. Lawyer of the OPs 6, 8, 9 prays for expunging the names of OP No. 7,  as OP No.7 had died.  The name of OP No.7 is expunged from the cause title of complaint petition.  On 04.03.2022, OPs 1-4 filed questionnaire.  ‘

On 05.04.2022, OPs 6, 8, 9 filed questionnaire.  On 12.05.2022, the complainant files reply to the questionnaire filed by the OPs 6, 8, 9.  On 13.06.2022, OPs 1-4 file evidence on affidavit.  OPs 6, 8, 9 filed a petition for treating their W/V as evidence on affidavit.  The prayer of OPs 6, 8, 9 is allowed.  On 26.07.2022, the complainant files questionnaire.  On 02.09.2022, OPs 1-4 filed reply and OPs 6, 8, 9 also filed reply separately.  OP No.5 did not turn up to contest the case, hence the case was heard ex-parte against the OP No.5.  On 09.11.2022, argument of Ld. Lawyer of the complainants was heard.  Complainant also files BNA.  On 19.12.2022, argument of OPs 1-4 was heard in part.  On 07.02.2023, OPs 1-4 pray for treating his W/V as BNA.  His prayer is allowed.  Argument of all the parties was heard in full.  Accordingly, we proceeded for giving judgement. 

Points for consideration :-

1. Are the complainants,  consumers?
2. Are the OPs guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice?
3. Are the complainants entitled to get relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons :-

Point No.1  :- 

On perusal of documents and records, it appears that the complainants intended to purchase a flat and a car parking space.  The OPs 5-9 executed and registered general power of attorney in favour of the OPs 1-4.  The OPs 5-9 entered into an agreement with the OPS 1-4 on 21.06.2014.  The complainants agreed to purchase a self contained flat measuring more or less 1030 Sq.ft. Super Built Up Area.  The complainants also booked a car parking space.  The total consideration price was Rs.28,93,450/-.  The details of the payment was stated in the agreement for sale. The balance amount was being paid through EMI.  As the complainants booked the flat the complainants are consumers U/S 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  Hence, the 1^st point is decided in favour of the complainants and against the OPs.

Point No.2  :- 

            The complainants were desirous of purchasing a flat and they booked a flat along with car parking space., at R.S. Dag No.769, L.R Dag No.582, R.S. Khatian No:444+8 decimals of danga land of R.S. Das No.446/838, L.R. Dag No.584 / 955, R.S. Khatian No:187, Mouza Boral, comprised in Dag No.769 and 446/838 under R.S. Khatian No.444 and 187.  Corresponding to L.R. Dag No.582 and 584/955 under L.R. Khatian No.39, 76, 61, 319, 710, 12, 247, 1216, 1004.  Now presently L.R. Khatian No.2598, 2595, 2596, 39, 2597 appearing to J.L. Khatian No.61, Touzi No.142, R.S. No.199 now within the limits of Rajpur Sonarpur Municipality, Holding No.427, Ward No.34, P.S.-Sonarpur, District – South  24 Parganas.  The total consideration price was Rs.28,93,450/-. The complainant paid Rs.26,10,655/- and  still some amount is due.  It was being paid through EMI.  The developers i.e. OPs 1-4 failed to provide proper service to the complainant.  Rather they are deficient in rendering proper service.  The Deed of Conveyance was not registered in the name of the complainants.  The OPs 1-4 adopted unfair trade practice by deceiving the complainants.  The acts of OPs 1-4 are illegal, unjust, mal file and deliberate violation to discharge their liabilities and obligations.  The OPs 1-4 are legally bound to discharge their duties and liabilities to provide service to the complainants in pursuance of their undertakings to effectuate the agreement for sale to bestow the right of ownership apart from the delivery of possession.  The OPs.1-4 willfully and deliberately neglected to discharge their duties and responsibilities.  Owing to gross negligence on the part of OPS 1-4, to perform their duties, the complainants faced huge monetary loss.  Hence it appears that OPs 1-4 are liable.  OP No.5 is also liable by not invoking the fresh power of attorney to OPs 1-4.  So, the 2^nd point is decided in favour of the complainants and against the OPs. 

Point No.3  :- 

            The complainants paid the amount of consideration for purchasing a flat along with a car parking space.  The flat falls within Rajpur Sonarpur Municipality.  The complainants made an agreement for sale for purchasing the flat in question from the developers allocation.  As a result, OPs 1, 2, 3, 4 are supposed to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the complainants.  In compliance with the contents of the agreement for sale dated 13.03.2016. OPs 1, 2, 3 4 failed to do the same.  Their registered power of attorney was revoked by OP No.5.  The complainants spent time in mental agony and pain.  The complainants spent a considerable amount. A small amount is outstanding. The complainants would provide the rest amount in the meantime i.e. at the time of registration.  But the OPs 1-4 did not take any step.  The deceitful activities of the OPs 1-4 and 5 have resulted in material loss to the complainants.  The complainants spent time in anxiety.  They were also harassed by the OPs for several times.  As OP No.5 did not invoke the fresh power of attorney the developers i.e. OPs.1-4 faced problem to do the pending work.  Thus the problem of the complainants was not solved.  Hence, the 3^rd point is decided in favour of the complainants and against the OPs.

            In the result, the complaint case succeeds.   

Hence, it is,

                                                                                               ORDERED

That the complaint case be and the same is allowed against the OPs 1, 2, 3, 4 on contest and ex-parte against OP No.5 with cost of Rs.50,000/-. 

That the OPs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 are directed to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the complainants subject to payment of the outstanding amount by the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order.

Alternatively, let the Deed of Conveyance be registered through the machinery of the Commission within 45 days from the date of this order.  

That the OPs 1, 2, 3,  4  jointly and/or severally are directed to complete the work of construction as specifically stated in the agreement dated 13.03.2016 within 45 days from the date of this order. 

 That the OPs 1, 2, 3, 4 are directed to hand over the keys to the complainants and to deliver vacant and peaceful possession of the subject property mentioned in Schedule-C of the Agreement within 45 days from the date of this order. 

That the OPs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 are directed to provide completion certificate to the complainants within the 45 days from the date of this order. 

OPs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 jointly and/or severally are directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainants for harassment and mental agony caused to the complainants within 45 days from the date of this order. 

That the litigation cost is to be paid by the OPs 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 jointly and/or severally within 45 days from the date of this order. 

That the complainants are at liberty to put the order into execution if the orders are not complied with within the stipulated period of 45 days from the date of this order. 

Let a copy of the order be supplied to the parties concerned free of cost.

That the final order will be available in the following website:www.confonet.nic.in.

Dictated and corrected by me

         Sangita Paul

           Member