This complaint is filed by the Complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficieny in service as well as unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs did neither execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the flat in favour of the Complainant or refund the settlement amount of Rs.1,50,000/- along with statutory interest theron till filing of this complaint.

The brief fact of the case of the Complainant is that originally he was a tenant under the land owners and enjoyed the tenanted portion undisputedly  and in an undisturbed manner. The land owners decided to promote and develop the suit property by erection of multi-storied building thereon. The OPs have agreed to allot a self-contained and independent flat to the Complainant on the ground floor of the building. The Complainant agreed to vacate his occupied portion and it was settled that in accordance with the sanctioned plan flat will be allotted to the Complainant measuring about 180 square feet covered area together with proportionate share of land and equal right in respect of the common areas, facilities and amenities. The value of the said flat was assessed at Rs.1,62,500/-. After completion of the construction work apart from some incomplete and unfinished work of the building as per the sanctioned building plan, the owner’s allocation had taken by the land owners in their custody and possession as per the terms and conditions of the development agreement. Apart from the owner’s allocation the developers sold the remaining flats to the intending purchasers. The Complainant being satisfied with the relevant papers regarding the land and the sanctioned plan had expressed his desired to purchase the said flat and accordingly entered into an agreement for sale on 13.09.2016. The Complainant paid a sum of Rs.75,000/- to the OPs as consideration money in cash at the time of execution of the agreement for sale. After completion of the construction work of the said flat the OPs did not hand over the peaceful khas and vacant possession of the flat in favour of the Complainant. The OPs also promised to hand over a copy of the completion certificate to the Complainant, but till date no such copy is given by the OPs in favour of the Complainant, practically the OPs have no intention to deliver the same. On several occasions the Complainant contacted with the developer for handing over the possession in the flat and execution of the sale deed in his favour, but to no effect. In this manner the OPs have totally deprieved the Complainant from using and enjoying the said property. On 17.12.2017 when the Complainant visited the office of the developers to know about the condition of the flat, he was physically assualted by the developers and driven out from the office of the developers. Immediately the Complainant went to the local police station and lodged one GDE vide a no-1257 dated 17.12.2017. Subsequently after few months the Complainant got a call from the OPs with a request to visit their office and at that point of time the Complainant was threatened and pressurized for settlement in respect of the said flat and the developer took his signature forcefully in the terms of settlement and the Complainant out of fear had to accept the same and put his signature. As per the settlement petition the Complainant relinquished his right, interest and claim over the said flat and in lieu of the Complainant will get Rs.3,00,000/- and to that effect one cheque has been issued amounting to Rs.3,00,000/- in his favour. Subsequently when the Complainant deposited the said cheque for encashment, the same has been dishounoured due to insufficient fund. Subsequently the developer has paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- in favour of the Complainant in cash in respect of the said dishounoured cheque. In that fashion till date the developer did not pay the rest settlement amount of Rs.1,50,000/- to the Complainant, which he is legally entitled to get against the said flat. In this manner the OPs have harassed the Complainant physically and mentally and also threatened that they will not execute the sale deed in respect of the said flat and also will not hand over the peaceful khas and vacant possession in the flat. On several times the Complainant requested the OPs but the OPs did not bother to pay any heed to his request. On 24.12.2018 all the OPs were requested by the Complainant when the Complainant had expressed his willingness and readiness to discharge his liabilities to complete the registration work. Till filing of this complaint as the OPs did not take any initiative or positive step, finding no other alternative the Complainant has approached before this Ld. Commission by filing this complaint praying for direction upon the OPs either jointly or severally to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the flat in his favour, alternatively, to pay the settlement amount of Rs.1,50,000/- along with statutory interest thereon in his favour, to deliver the peaceful vacant physical possession of the questioned flat, to complete the flat and delivered the same in habitable condition, to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of harassment, mental agony, negligent act and deficiency in service, to provide completion certificate in respect of the multi-storied building and litigation cost to him.

     The petition of complaint have been contested by the OPs by filing conjoint written version. The OPs have contended that admittedly the Complainant was a tenant under the land owners but during possession as tenant he became defaulter from making payment of his monthly rent for which the status of the Complainant as tenant was ceased and he has lost his right to protect his tenancy under the land owner. However, in a good gesture one flat was allotted in favour of the Complainant in lieu of making payment of some consideration amount. The Complainant has paid a sum of Rs.75,000/- in favour of the OPs towards consideration money in cash to purchase one flat on the ground floor measuring about 180 square feet more or less at the proposed multi-storied building, for which an agreement for sale was executed by and between the parties. But subsequently the Complainant got refund of Rs,3,00,000/- and in this respect the Complainant put his signature on the stamp paper for Rs.10/- stating that as he got refund of Rs.3,00,000/- from the OPs, hence he will not claim the flat and/or any property from the OPs. Therefore, the question of execution and registration of deed of conveyance and/or hand over the possession in the flat is totally baseless and has no legal force. The OPs have also denied that the Complainant visited the office of the developers on 17.12.2017 for knowing the condition of the flat when the Complainant was physically assualted by the developers. The OPs have strongly denied that due to assualt by the developer the Complainant was compelled to undergo treatment at Baranagar State General Hospital along with lodged GDE vide  no-1257 dated 17.12.2017. By making such averment the Complainant has tried to attract the sympathy of the Ld. Commission, which according to the OPs is not maintainable. According to the OPs the complaint being frivolous, baseless and concocted one, the same is liable to be dismissed with cost.

      Both parties have adduced their respective evidence on affidavit and they were cross-examined by each other by way of filing questionnaire and replies. The OPs have filed BNA with a copy to the other side. No BNA is forthcoming on behalf of the Complainant.

    We have carefully perused the entire record, documents and heard argument at length advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the both parties. It is seen by us that the instant dispute revolves within a very short compass as to whether the OPs have already paid the balance amount of Rs.1,50,000/- to the Complainant or not and whether the Complainant is entitled to get the said amount of Rs.1,50,000/- from the OPs along with other reliefs as sought for or not. Admittedly the Complainant was entitled to get Rs.3,00,000/- from the OPs in lieu of the questioned flat which was allotted to him by the OPs earlier. Be it mentioned that the Complainant was a tenant in the said building and when the land owners decided to erect a multi-storied building after demolishing the existing structure, then the land owners and developers decided and agreed to allot one flat to this Complainant on the ground floor of the building measuring about 180 square feet more or less along with other facilities and amenities and proportionate common area. To purchase this flat the Complainant paid a sum of Rs.75,000/- in cash to the OPs. It is pertinent to mention that for erection of multi-storied building development agreement was executed by and between the land owners and developers. Subsequently the Complainant and the developers have agreed after discussion that if the developers will pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to him, then the Complainant shall not claim the questioned flat and /or any portion of the flat from the OPs. It is also an admitted fact that initially the developers issued one cheque in favour of the Complainant to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- but after deposition of the said cheque the same was bounced due to insufficient fund. Thereafter the OPs have paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the Complainant in cash out of Rs.3,00,000/- in total. Therefore the Complainant is entitled to get the balance amount of Rs.1,50,000/- from the OPs.

During argument the Ld. Counsel for the OPs has attracted our notice to the agreement dated 25.06.2018 executed by and between the Developers and the Complainant on the stamp paper for Rs.10/- bearing no-22AB  637983. We have carefully perused the said agreement, from where it is evident that the OPs are agreed to pay Rs.3,00,000/- to the Complainant in lieu of the questioned flat and the Complainant being agreed with such proposal of the developers had accepted the said amount. In view of this agreement the earlier agreement executed by and between the same parties is cancelled and the developer will be entitled to sell out the said flat to any third party of their choice and in that context the Complainant will not be entitled to raise any objection. In the agreement dated 25.06.2018 the Complainant had put his signature mentioning that he had received Rs.3,00,000/- from the developers and the Complainant shall not claim the flat and/or any portion of the constructed area in that multi-storied building.

From the aforementioned agreement dated 25.06.2018 it is crystal clear that the Complainant has already received an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- from the OPs, but inspite of receipt of the said amount the Complainant has filed this complaint on 28.06.2019. It is also surprising to us that after receipt of the agreed amount by the Complainant from the OPs in lieu of the flat this complaint is filed by the Complainant praying for direction upon the OPs to execute and register the deed of conveyance in his favour in respect of the flat along with completion certificate. But where he has no locus-standi in respect of the questioned flat, what prompted him to make such prayer in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint. Therefore the Complainant is not at all entitled to get any relief through this complaint as sought for.

Going by the foregoing discussion hence it is ordered that the Consumer Complaint being no-CC/12/2019 is hereby dismissed on contest without any cost.

Let plain copy of this judgment be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR.

Dictated and corrected by

[HON'BLE MRS. Silpi Majumder]
MEMBER