DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS,
AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 144
C.C. CASE NO. 06 OF 2018
DATE OF FILING: 15.01.2018 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: 02.07.2019
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member : Jhunu Prasad
COMPLAINANT : 1. Purnima Chatterjee & Others, W/o – Tapan Kr. Chatterjee, 3/33, Brajamoni Debya Road, P.S. - Thakurpukur, Kolkata – 700 061.
2. Tapan Kr. Chatterjee, S/o – Lt. Sarbeswar Chatterjee, 3/33, Brajamoni Debya Road, P.S. - Thakurpukur, Kolkata – 700 061.
3. Juhi Chatterjee, D/o – Tapan Kr. Chatterjee, 620, Jones Street, Sanfransisco California, Pin – 94102, United States of America rep. by her constituted attorney, Purnima Chatterjee.
O.P/O.Ps : 1. Walden Estate Limited, Regd. Office at A/64, Diamond Park Road, P.S.- Thakurpukur, Kolkata – 700 104.
2. Dipankar Naskar, Director, Walden Estate Limited., S/o – Niharkanti Naskar, Genex Valley, Tower no. 17, Flat no. – 6A, Diamond Harbour Road, Joka, near ESI Hospital, P.S. – Haridevpur, Kolkata – 700 104.
___________________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
Facts leading to the filing of the instant case by the complainant may be epitomized as follows.
The sale agreements both dated 14.03.2014 were executed by and between the complainants and the O.P.s. One agreement was related to 2 plots of land bearing nos. A-66 and A-67, measuring 4 katha in RS and LR dag no. 1446 succinctly described in schedule A to the complaint and this agreement was executed by and between Purnima Chatterjee and her daughter Juhi Chatterjee i.e. complainant nos. 1 and 3 on one hand and the O.P.s on the other for a total consideration of Rs. 4,80,000/-. Another agreement related to a plot of land bearing no. A-68 measuring 2 katha in the property described in schedule A to the complaint and this agreement was executed between complainant nos. 1 and 2 on one hand and the O.P.s on the other for a total consideration price of Rs. 2,70,000/-. Consideration price for all those lands were fully paid by the complainants to the O.P.s. The O.P.s agreed to develop the land within 12 months of the date of agreement. Deed of conveyance was also registered and executed in favour of the complainants by the O.P.s in respect of those plots of land. Thereafter, the complainants have come to know that the O.P.s are not absolute owners of the project land as described in schedule A to the complaint and that he is only one of the co-owners in that land. So, the complainants have filed the instant case praying for a direction to the opposite party to deliver possession of the said land to the complainants or alternatively to return the consideration money with interest along with compensation etc. Hence, this case.
Notice of the case has been served upon the O.P.s. But, the O.P.s have not turned up to contest the case. So, the case proceeds ex-parte against them. However, the O.P. has been allowed to file questionnaire in terms of the order dated 26.12.2018 passed by Hon’ble State Commission in revision petition no. RP/94/2018 and the complainant has also filed reply to other questionnaire.
POINTS FOR DETERMINATION
- Is the case maintainable in law?
- Are the O.Ps guilty of deficiency in service as alleged?
- Are the complainants entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for?
Complainants have filed evidence on affidavit which is kept in record.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no. 1 :
On perusal of the record, it is found that 2 causes of action have been joined together by the complainants in this case. The case relates to 3 plots of land marked as A-66, A-67 and A-68, vide schedule B to the complaint. Complainant nos. 1 and 3 are interested in plot nos. A-66 and A-67 and for these 2 plots, there have been a separate sale agreement and a separate conveyance deed executed between the parties. Another plot of land i.e. A-68 is also involved in this case and it is complainant nos. 1 and 2, not complainant no. 3, who are involved with this plot of land. There is also a separate agreement and a separate deed of conveyance executed between the parties in respect of this plot of land i.e. A-68. All these facts transpire in the very petition of complaint and from all these facts it is found that all complainants are not jointly interested in all plots of land. It is true that the complainants have same interest against the same person; but, this fact alone does not give any rise to any occasion to the complainants for filing joint complaint in as much as section 12 (1) (c) of CP Act, 1986 stands in the way of maintainability of such case. Section 12 (1) (c) of CP Act, 1986 runs as follows:
“Section 12 (1):- a complaint in relation to any goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or any service provided or agreed to be provided may be filed with a District Forum by - ……………………………………………………………….
(c) one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, with the permission of the District Forum, on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all consumers so interested;”
Above provision makes it clear that a prior permission should be taken from District Forum while filing a case, when more consumers are joined together as complainants in a single case. Coming to the facts of the instant case, it is found that no such permission has been taken by the complainants for filing such joint complaint. Non-compliance of the above provision by the complainants seems to have made the complaint not maintainable in law. Hence, point no. 1 is answered against the complainant.
In view of discussion under point no. 1, point nos. 2 and 3 require no discussion whatsoever and these 2 points are also determined against the complainants.
In the result, the case fails.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complainant case be and the same is dismissed ex-parte against the O.Ps, without any cost.
I/We agree 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 complainant case be and the same is dismissed ex-parte against the O.Ps, without any cost.
