West Bengal

South 24 Parganas

CC/436/2014

Sri. G Rajesh, S/O Sri N. Gopalan. - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. Sri Avijit Das, S/O Late Ranjit Kr. Das. Partners of M/S. Jayashree Construction. - Opp.Party(s)

31 Jul 2015

ORDER

      DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPLUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , JUDGES’ COURT, ALIPORE KOLKATA-700 027

 

C.C. CASE NO. _436_ OF ___2014___

 

DATE OF FILING : 17.9.2014                      DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT:  31.7.2015__

 

Present                        :   President       :   Udayan Mukhopadhyay

 

                                        Member(s)    :    Mrs. Sharmi Basu & Jinjir Bhattacharya

                                                                             

COMPLAINANT             :   Sri G. Rajesh, s/o Sri N. Gopalan of 5/26, Rajendra prosad Colony also known as 3/3, Prince Golam Md. Shah Road, P.S. Jadavpur, Kolkata -33.

 

-VERSUS  -

 

O.P/O.Ps                            :    1.     Sri Avijit Das, s/o late Ranjit Kumar Das

                                                2.     Smt. Jayashree Ghosh,d/o Sri Surendra Nath Ghosh

Both are Partners of M/s Jayashree Construction Group of 2/24, Rajendra Prasad Colony, P.S. Jadavpur, Kolkata – 33.

3.     Sri Swapan Das
4.     Sri Ratan Das, both sons of late Kanailal Das
5.     Smt. Gouri Das, w/o late Anil Das
6.     Sri Avijit Das.
7.     Sri Amit Das, both sons of late Anil Das

     All of premises no.5/31, Rajendra Prosad Colony, P.S. Jadavpur, Kolkata – 33.

8.     Smt. Manju Dasgupta (Das), d/o late Kanai Lal Das,w/o Sri Ajoy Kr. Dasgupta of Purbapra Near Santa Bazar, P.O Laskarpur, P.S. Sonarpur, Kolkata – 153.

 

________________________________________________________________________

 

                                                            J  U  D  G  E  M  E  N  T

 

Sri Udayan Mukhopadhyay, President                                    

            This application under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant on the ground that the complainant entered into an agreement for sale with the O.P nos. 1 and 2 , the developer, by an agreement dated 16.12.2010 for one self contained flat measuring 550 sq.ft more or less at the second floor North East portion with the total consideration of Rs.8 lacs together with undivided proportionate share of land at premises no. 5/31, Rajendra Prosad Colony, P.S. Jadavpur, Kolkata – 33 which has been mentioned in the schedule B of this complaint. It has further stated that the complainant paid cash money of Rs.1,50,000/- as an earnest money by way of advance out of total consideration amount in terms of the agreement dated 16.12.2010 and thereafter the developer no. 1 and 2 duly received all the consideration money and issued money receipts except Rs.55000/- which will be paid by the complainant to the O.P nos. 1 and 2 at the time of registration. It has stated that complainant already obtained physical possession of the said flat from the developer, O.P nos. 1 and 2 and presently possessed the same without any hindrance since July 2012 . But till date neither the developer nor the owners have yet to take any measure to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant in respect of the said flat. It has stated that the complainant has served a copy of the draft deed but finally some of the owners disagree with others not to effect registration of the said flat and complainant requested repeatedly over phone and personal visit with the O.Ps but the O.P nos. 1 and 2 developers as well as the owners did not pay heed to it. Hence, the complaint ,praying for compensation of Rs.1 lac and registration of the deed of conveyance and Rs.5000/- per month for non-compliance of the terms and conditions of the agreement and cost.

            The O.P-4 filed written version and has denied all the allegations leveled against him and it is the positive case of the O.P-4 that he is expressing his willingness and readiness to execute and register the sale deed in favour of the complainant provided the complainant is able to prove his case and get an order from the Ld. Forum to that effect.

            The other O.Ps namely O.P nos.3,5,6,7 and 8 already filed one application on 30.11.2014 and another one on 7.5.2015 expressing their willingness to execute and register the sale deed in favour of the complainant.

It further appears that the case against O.P nos. 1 and 2 ,the developers, is running in exparte

Points for decision in this case is whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps or not.

                                                            Decision with reasons

Considering the telling circumstances that land owners O.P nos. 3 to 8 have no objection in relates to execution and registration of the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant. So, we do not find any cogent ground to hold that they are responsible for deficiency in service.

Moreover, O.P nos. 1 and 2 are star persons who have collected almost entire consideration money of Rs.7,45,000/- out of Rs.8 lacs and did not cooperate to execute and register the deed of conveyance and of course, they are not coming to the Forum for their remaining dues of Rs.55000/-. In this circumstances we find that due to non-cooperation of O.P nos. 1 and 2 and when complainant purchased the flat from the allocation of the developer, the O.P nos. 1 and 2, they have made deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for which complainant has been compelled to file this case.

            Admittedly complainant is in possession and he is peacefully enjoying that ,for which one application is filed on behalf of the complainant that his client is only claiming registration along with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- . Besides that there is no other claim.

 

            Accordingly, we find that it is a fit case to allow the complaint.

            Hence,

                                                            Ordered

That the application filed under section 12 of the C.P Act is allowed on contest against the O.P nos. 3 to 8 and exparte against O.P nos. 1 and 2 , the developer.

The developers have to pay cost of Rs.10,000/- and compensation to the tune of Rs.45000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which the entire amount of Rs.55000/- will be adjusted from the remaining consideration money of Rs.55000/- which is lying due from the complainant .

All the O.Ps are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the flat in dispute in favour of the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which, complainant is at liberty to approach this Forum for execution and registration of the deed of conveyance through the machinery of the Forum.

            It may be mentioned here that when O.P nos. 1 and 2 is unwilling to appear in that case, execution and registration of the deed of conveyance will be made by the owner and machinery of the Forum will stand as a confirming party on behalf of O.P nos. 1 and 2.

Let a plain copy of this judgement be handed over to the parties free of cost.

 

 

 

Member                                                           Member                                                           President

 

Dictated and corrected by me

 

 

 

 

                        President

 

 

 

The judgement in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,

 

 

 

                                                            Ordered

That the application filed under section 12 of the C.P Act is allowed on contest against the O.P nos. 3 to 8 and exparte against O.P nos. 1 and 2 , the developer.

The developers have to pay cost of Rs.10,000/- and compensation to the tune of Rs.45000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which the entire amount of Rs.55000/- will be adjusted from the remaining consideration money of Rs.55000/- which is lying due from the complainant .

All the O.Ps are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the flat in dispute in favour of the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which, complainant is at liberty to approach this Forum for execution and registration of the deed of conveyance through the machinery of the Forum.

            It may be mentioned here that when O.P nos. 1 and 2 is unwilling to appear in that case, execution and registration of the deed of conveyance will be made by the owner and machinery of the Forum will stand as a confirming party on behalf of O.P nos. 1 and 2.

Let a plain copy of this judgement be handed over to the parties free of cost.

 

 

 

Member                                                           Member                                                           President