DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS,
AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 144
C.C. CASE NO. 20 OF 2019
DATE OF FILING: 06.02.2019 DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 23.09.2019
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member : Jhunu Prasad
Member : Jagadish Chandra Barman
COMPLAINANT : Mrs. Merry Chowdhury, W/O – Sri Manab Chowdhury, Paschim Sanpui para, Basukati, Bally, Howrah - 711227.
O.P/O.Ps : 1. M/s Star Construction, A Partnership Firm Registered Office at South Noapara, P.O. & P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata - 700150.
2. Sri Ranjit Kumar Dutta, S/O – Late Debendra Nath Dutta, Behara para, Kalitala, P.O. & P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata - 700150.
3. Sri Ashim Chakraborty, S/O – Late Sardar Charan Chakraborty, J.N. Bose Road (Purbayan), P.O. – Subhas Gram, P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata - 700150.
4. Sri Dilip Mandal, S/O – Rabin Mandal, Kamrabad Biswas Para, P.O. & P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata - 700150.
5. Sri Ranjit Kumar Sarkar, S/O – Late Nityananda Sarkar, Banstala, P.B. Sarani, P.O. – Rajpur, P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata - 700150.
6. Sri Dhruba Majumder, S/O – Late Sukhomoy Majumdar, Milonpally, P.O. & P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata - 700150.
7. Sri Ashoke Kumar Chatterjee, S/O – Late Shibram Chatterjee, South Nowapara, P.O. & P.S. – Sonarpur, Kolkata - 700150.
JUDGMENT
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
The epitome of the facts leading to the filing of the instant case by the complainant runs as follows.
O.P. nos. 1 to 6 are developers and O.P. no. 7 is the land owner. The developers raised a multi storied building upon the land of O.P. no. 7 by virtue of a development agreement dated 11.09.2013. A sale agreement dated 23.12.2013 was executed by and between the complainant and the developers and thereby the developers agreed to sell a shop room succinctly described in schedule B to the complaint for a total consideration price of Rs. 15,000,00/-. The complainant paid RS. 13,50,000/- as consideration price to the developers. After partial completion to the building, the possession of the shop room was also made over to the complainant. But, deed of conveyance was not registered in favour of the complainant by developers in spite of constant persuasion by the complainant in that regard, so, the complainant has filed the instant case alleging deficiency in service on the part of the developers and prays for issuing an order directing the developers to execute and register a deed of conveyance in favour of him with respect to her shop room and also to pay compensation etc. Hence, this case.
O.P. nos. 1 to 6 i.e. the developers have filed W/V herein. It is mainly contended by them that the power of attorney was cancelled by the land owner i.e. O.P. no. 7 and therefore they have not been able to complete the remaining work of the building and also to effect registration of the shop room in favour of the complainant. They have no deficiency in service on their part and therefore the case should be dismissed in limini against them. O.P. no. 7 i.e. the land owner has also filed W/V wherein it is averred that he has never cancelled the power of attorney of the developers as alleged by O.P. no. 1 to 6. Power of attorney automatically terminated after expiry of 24 months from the date of execution i.e. 11.09.2013. According to him, the developers have not completed the work of the building and they are liable to the complainant for alleged deficiency in service. O.P. no.7 has no deficiency in service on his part and the case should be dismissed in limini against him with cost.
Upon the averments of the parties, the following points are formulated for consideration.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
- Are the O.P.s guilty of deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for?
EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES
Both the parties have led their evidence on affidavit and these are kept in record.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no. 1 and 2 :
Already heard the submissions of Ld. Lawyers appearing for the parties. Perused the petition of complaint, W/Vs and also the materials on record. Considered all these.
Admittedly, the developers made an agreement with the complainant for selling a shop room to him for consideration price of Rs. 15,00,000/-. Complainant has paid Rs. 13,50,000/- to the developers. Possession of the shop room has also been handed over to the complainant by developers. All these facts go undisputed. What the complainant demands now is nothing but registration of the shop room purchased by him. It is the version of the developers that they could not effect the registration in favour of the complainant and also complete the remaining works of the building for the reason that their power of attorney was cancelled by the land owner i.e. O.P. no. 7. But this version of the developers appears to be not correct; it is a misleading one. The fact is that O.P. no. 7 did never cancel the power of attorney. The power of attorney automatically terminated after expiry of 24 months from the date of its execution i.e. 11.09.2013. The developers agreed to complete their project work within 2 years i.e. 24 months from the date of the execution of power of attorney. But they did not do so; they delayed the execution of their project work beyond the prescribed period i.e. 24 months from the date of execution of power of attorney. In our opinion, the developers deliberately allowed the project time to have been expired the reason is best known to them. Be that as it may, the developers are found to be guilty of deficiency in service for not effecting registration of the shop room in favour of the complainant within the prescribed time and the complainant being a consumer cannot be made suffer for negligence on the part of the developers. The developers will have to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant in respect of the shop room of the complainant and the land owner i.e. O.P. no. 7 will have to cooperate with the developers in the matter of registration of deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant. However, the developers are entitled to get Rs. 1,50,000/- as balance consideration money from the complainant and the complainant is also required to pay the amount to the developers. But taking into consideration the negligent conduct of the developers, we do say that the complainant will make payment of the balance consideration money i.e. Rs. 1,50,000/- to the developers i.e. O.P. nos. 1 to 6 only when the developers complete the rest incomplete work in respect of the shop room of the complainant.
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 to 7 with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by O.P. nos. 1 to 6 only to the complainant.
All the O.P.s i.e. O.P. no. 1 to 7 are directed to execute and register a deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant with respect to her shop room within a month of this order. O.P. nos. 1 to 6 are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation for causing harassment and mental agony to the complainant within the aforesaid period i.e. a month of this order. They i.e. O.P. nos. 1 to 6 will get the payment of balance consideration money i.e. Rs. 1,50,000/- from the complainant, if they complete the incomplete work of the shop room of the complainant within the aforesaid period i.e. a month of this order. If the O.P.s / developers fail to carry out the direction of the forum as above within a month of this order, the compensation amount and the cost amount will bear interest at the rate of 10% p.a. till full realization thereof and in that case the complainant is also given liberty to realize the aforesaid amount by execution of this award. She is also at liberty to render the incomplete works of her shop room complete on her own initiative having spent the remaining portion of consideration money lying at her disposal.
Register-in-charge is directed to supply a free certified copy of this judgment at once to the parties concerned.
I/We agree Member Member President
Directed and corrected by me
President
The judgment in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.P. nos. 1 to 7 with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by O.P. nos. 1 to 6 only to the complainant.
All the O.P.s i.e. O.P. no. 1 to 7 are directed to execute and register a deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant with respect to her shop room within a month of this order. O.P. nos. 1 to 6 are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation for causing harassment and mental agony to the complainant within the aforesaid period i.e. a month of this order. They i.e. O.P. nos. 1 to 6 will get the payment of balance consideration money i.e. Rs. 1,50,000/- from the complainant, if they complete the incomplete work of the shop room of the complainant within the aforesaid period i.e. a month of this order. If the O.P.s / developers fail to carry out the direction of the forum as above within a month of this order, the compensation amount and the cost amount will bear interest at the rate of 10% p.a. till full realization thereof and in that case the complainant is also given liberty to realize the aforesaid amount by execution of this award. She is also at liberty to render the incomplete works of her shop room complete on her own initiative having spent the remaining portion of consideration money lying at her disposal.
Register-in-charge is directed to supply a free certified copy of this judgment at once to the parties concerned.
