22.....05.01.2022....
Today is fixed for delivery of judgment/final order.
Final order contains 4 pages is ready. It is sealed, signed and delivered in open Forum/Commission.
It is,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against the O.Ps. with cost of Rs. 10,000/-.
The O.Ps. are directed to refund the rest advance amount of Rs. 1,12,000/- along with interest @6% p.a. w.e.f. 11.04.2016 (the date of last payment) till realization of the entire amount to the complainant by 90 days from the date of this order. The O.Ps. are also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 30,000/- for mental pain and agony and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant within 90 days from the date of this order.
Both the O.Ps. are jointly and severally liable to comply the final order by 90 days from the date of this order.
Let copies of final order be supplied to both the parties free of cost as per rules.
The Final order also be made available in www.confonet.nic.in .
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
SOUTH 24-PARGANAS
AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 144
C.C. NO. 110 OF 2019
DATE OF FILING DATE OF ADMISSION DATE OF FINAL ORDER
01.08.2019 20.08.2019 05.01.2022
Present : President : Asish Kumar Senapati
Member : Sangita Paul
COMPLAINANT :1. Sri Sutanu Bhadra, Residing at Titas Apartment, Flat No. – 1B, 224 Rajdanga Road, P.S. – Kasba, Kolkata-700107.
Versus
O.P/O.Ps : 1. Sri Bikash Kumar Singh, S/o- Baram Deo Singh, Prprieater of M/S Singh Construction, 141 Bosepukur Road, P.S. – Kasba, Kolkata – 700042.
2. M/S Singh Construction, 141C, Bosepukur Road, P.S. – Kasba, Kolkata – 700042.
Advocate for the Complainant : Sri Suvendu Das
Advocate for the O.Ps. : Mr. Samsul Alam
Sri Asish Kumar Senapati, President
One Sri Sutanu Bhadra (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) filed the case against Sri Bikash Kumar Singh, Prprieater of M/S Singh Construction and another (hereinafter referred to as the O.Ps.) praying for either refund of advance amount of Rs. 1,72,000/- with interest @ 18% p.a. till realization of the entire amount or to deliver possession of the plot by executing and registering the deed of conveyance, compensation and litigation cost against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint is as follows:
The complainant booked a plot at a consideration of Rs . 2,20,000/- on executing a deed of agreement dated 17.12.2013 in respect of a plot No. B 10 measuring 1.5 kathas on payment of Rs. 60,000/- in cash and the rest amount through installments. That the complainants paid Rs. 1,72,000/- and the O.Ps. did not develop the land as per agreement and did not receive the installments after 26th installments. Hence, the complainant has filed the case praying for a direction upon the O.Ps. for hand over the possession of the plot as per agreement dated 17.12.2013 on receipt of balance amount coupled with execution and registration of deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant or in the alternative refund of money paid by the complainant with interest @ 18% p.a., compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 50,000/-.
The O.Ps. contested the case by filing W.V. contending that the alleged agreement for sale dated 17.12.2013 was executed without consideration and so the said agreement is invalid. That the complainant paid only Rs. 1,72,000/- and as per terms of agreement the complainant have to pay Rs. 28,000/- towards balance amount. The complainant is not entitled to get 10% discount over the consideration price for no-fulfillment of the terms of agreement. The complainant has no cause of action. Hence, the case may be dismissed with cost.
On the basis of the above versions, the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :-
- Is the complainant a consumer under the provisions of C.P Act?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.?
- Is the complainant entitled to get any relief against the O.Ps., as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no. 1 :-
The Ld. Advocate for the complainant submits that the complainant entered into an agreement for sale with the O.Ps. on 17.12.2013 on certain terms and conditions and paid Rs. 1,72,000/- in advance out of total consideration of Rs. 2,20,000/-. It is urged that the O.Ps. did not develop the land in spite of lapse of the period mentioned in the agreement. He submits that the complainant is a consumer.
In reply, the Ld. Advocate for the O.Ps. submits that the complainant is not a consumer.
We have gone through the materials on record and considered the submission of both sides. We find that both parties entered into an agreement dated 17.12.2013 on certain terms and conditions. It is the allegation of the complainant that the O.Ps. failed to develop the land even after a considerable period. The O.Ps. have failed to substantiate that they have developed the land in question in terms of the agreement. Hence, we hold that the complainant is a consumer.
Point nos. 2 & 3 :-
The Ld. Advocate for the complainants submits that the complainant paid Rs. 1,72,000/- as advance out of total consideration amount of Rs. 2,20,000/- and it is also admitted by the O.Ps. in para-7 of the W.V. It is urged that the O.Ps. have not yet developed the land in terms of agreement dated 17.12.2013 and they are also silent about the fate of the project. He contends that the O.Ps. may be directed to refund the advance amount of Rs. 1,72,000/- with interest @18% p.a. till realization. It is also submitted that the complainant is entitled to get compensation and litigation cost against the O.Ps.
Per contra, the Ld. Advocate for the O.Ps. submits that the O.Ps. have no deficiency in service and the complainant is at fault for non-payment of rest consideration amount. It is contended that the complainant is not entitled to get any compensation and litigation cost against the O.Ps.
We have gone through the materials on record and consider the submission of both sides. Admittedly, the complainant entered into an agreement for sale with the O.Ps. on 17.12.2013 on certain terms and conditions including development of the land in question. Admittedly, the complainant paid Rs. 1,72,000/- to the O.Ps. up to 11.04.2016. We find from the photocopy of money receipt dated 18.11.2019 that the complainant received Rs. 60,000/- from the O.P. No. 1 in cash out of settled amount of Rs. 1,95,000/-. We find that the O.Ps. have deficiency in service and the complainant is entitled to get back his advance amount of Rs. 1,12,000/- after adjustment of Rs. 60,000/- already received by him on 18.11.2019. We also think that the complainant is entitled to get simple interest @6% p.a. w.e.f. 11.04.2016 (the date of last payment) till realization of the entire amount. In our considered opinion, the complainant is also entitled to get compensation of Rs. 30,000/- for mental pain and agony and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- against the O.Ps.
Both points are thus disposed of.
In the result, the complaint case succeeds.
Fees paid are corrected.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against the O.Ps. with cost of Rs. 10,000/-.
The O.Ps. are directed to refund the rest advance amount of Rs. 1,12,000/- along with interest @6% p.a. w.e.f. 11.04.2016 (the date of last payment) till realization of the entire amount to the complainant by 90 days from the date of this order. The O.Ps. are also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 30,000/- for mental pain and agony and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant within 90 days from the date of this order.
Both the O.Ps. are jointly and severally liable to comply the final order by 90 days from the date of this order.
Let copies of final order be supplied to both the parties free of cost as per rules.
The Final order also be made available in www.confonet.nic.in .
Dictated and corrected by me
President
