J U D G E M E N T
Shorn of unnecessary details, the case present before the Forum for adjudication may be summarized thus:-
In succinct, the case of the Complaint, is that, the Complainant entered into an ‘Agreement for Sale’ on 24.03.2006, with the Opposite Party No. 1 for purchasing a self contained residential flat, being Flat No. A2, on the 1st floor, measuring 990 sq. ft. area in a multistoried building named “Pratyasha Apartment”, specifically described in the ‘A–Schedule’ of the complaint for a total consideration amount of Rs. 6,43,500/- only. The Complainant claimed to have paid a total sum of Rs. 7,78,000/- only to the Opposite Parties, i.e. the entire consideration amount along with the cost of registration for making the arrangement to do the Sale Deed executed and registered in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant. But the Opposite Parties never intended to receive the balance consideration amount and to deliver the actual vacant possession of the said flat to the Complainant and also never executed and registered the Sale Deed in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant, in spite of several requests made by the Complainant.
Ultimately, the Complainant sent a legal notice to the Opposite Parties on 15.01.2014 requesting for necessary step for doing the execution and registration of the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant, but the Opposite Parties refused to accept the same. This indifferent attitude of the Opposite Parties failing to execute and register the Sale Deed in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant amounts to deficiency and negligent manner of service on the part of the Opposite Parties and by such indifferent attitude of the Opposite Parties caused mental agony and harassment to the Complainant for which he asked for compensation along with redressal as prayed for.
Resisting the Complaint, the Opposite Party no. 3 filed Written Version for denying the contentions and all material allegations made by the complainant in the Petition of Complaint and stating inter alia, that the Complainant has no cause of action to file the instant case, is not maintainable.
The case, as a whole, stated by the Opposite Party No. 3 in gist, is that, the Opposite Party No. 3 had almost admitted the main allegation made by the Complainant and stated that the Complainant and the Opposite Party No. 1 had executed a formal ‘Agreement for Sale’ on 24.03.2006 and the Opposite Parties had already received the entire amount of consideration money together with the other cost from the Complainant as stated by him. The Opposite Party No. 3 also admitted to receive the legal notice of the Complainant but denied that they had ignored the legal notice sent by the Complainant and stated that they had replied the same by a letter dated 06.02.2014 wherein the Opposite Parties specifically expressed their readiness and willingness to execute and register the Sale Deed in respect of the said flat. Thus the Opposite Party No. 3 had/has no fault and still ready and willing to do their part of obligation towards the Complainant by executing and registering the Sale Deed in favour of the Complainant had denied any negligence or/and deficiency in rendering service on their part and the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for. Hence, the Opposite Party No. 3 prayed for dismissal of this case.
Despite proper service of the notice to the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2, the concern Opposite Party never appeared before the Forum to contest the case nor he had filed any ‘Written Version’ on his behalf or through any Ld. Advocate/Representative. Thus the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2 have relinquished his scope to refute the case. So, the instant case has been heard ex-parte against the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2.
Points for Determination
1. Is the complaint maintainable under the C. P. Act ?
2. Was there any negligence or deficiency in service
on the part of the O.Ps ?
3. Is the complainant entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?
Decision with Reasons
All the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of convenience and brevity.
The main dispute between the Complainant and the Opposite Parties is that in spite of executing the ‘Agreement for Sale’ dated 24.03.2006 the Opposite Parties not yet executed and registered the ‘Sale Deed’ in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant.
We have carefully considered and scrutinized the submission made before us by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant and also the Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Party No. 3 and also critically perused all the material documents on record.
On overall evaluation of the argument advanced by the Ld. Advocates of both the parties, and on critical appreciation of the case record, it is clearly evident that an ‘Agreement for Sale’ was executed by and between the Complainant and the Opposite Parties on 24.03.2006, the photocopies of which was filed by the Complainant for purchasing a self contained residential flat, being Flat No. A2, on the 1st floor, measuring 990 sq. ft. area in a multistoried building named “Pratyasha Apartment”, specifically described in the ‘A–Schedule’ of the complaint for a total consideration amount of Rs. 6,43,500/- only.
The record reveals that the Complainant claimed to have paid a total sum of Rs. 7,78,000/- only to the Opposite Parties, i.e. the entire consideration amount along with the cost of registration for making the arrangement to do the Sale Deed executed and registered in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant, which is noticeably evident that the Opposite Party No. 3 has specifically admitted such fact by filing his Written Version before the Forum.
But the fact remains that actually the only contesting Opposite Party No. 3 had explicitly admitted all the allegations made by the Complainant and specifically expressed his intention by filing the Written Version and at the time of hearing the argument the Ld. Advocate of the Opposite Party No. 3 also admitted to do the part of his obligations towards the Complainant.
So, in view of the above findings manifestly we are of opinion that in the present situation the all the Opposite Parties are obliged to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said flat (as stated in the ‘A–Schedule’ in the complaint) in favour of the Complainant.
It is also opined by the Forum that though the Opposite Party No. 3 had appeared and contested and purposely expressed his intention to do his part of commitment as per the said ‘Agreement for Sale’ dated 24.03.2006, we are not awarded any compensation against the Opposite party No. 3.
Therefore, in light of the above analysis, we are inclined to hold that the Complainant has successfully proved his case and is entitled to get the relief as prayed for and consequently the points for determination are decided in affirmative.
In short, the Complainant deserves success.
In the result, we proceed to pass
O R D E R
That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the Opposite Party No. 3 and also allowed ex-parte against the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2 with cost of Rs. 3,000/- only payable by all Opposite Parties within one month from the date of this ‘Order’.
That all the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally directed to hand over the actual vacant possession of the said flat to the Complainant within one month from the date of this ‘Order’.
That all the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally be directed to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant within one month from the date of this ‘Order’. In default, the Complainant has liberty to execute and register the same through the Consumer Forum.
That all the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally be directed to bear the entire registration cost at present rate, as the Complainant had already paid the said amount to the Opposite Parties.
That all the Opposite Parties No. 1 & 2 jointly and severally are further be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- only, to the Complainant, as compensation for harassment and mental agony within one month from the date of this ‘Order’.
In the event of non compliance of any portion of the order by the O.Ps within a period of one month from the date of this order, both the O.Ps shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 200/- per day, from the date of this order till full satisfaction of the decree, and such amount shall be paid and shall be deposited by both the O.Ps to the State Consumer Welfare Fund.
Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.
