In the Court of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata, 8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087. CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 75 / 2008 1) Smt. Sarnoni Das, 140, Hemanta Mukhopadhyay Sarani, Kolkata-700029. ---------- Complainant ---Verses--- 1) Anu Burman, 28/1, Ritchi Road, Kolkata-19. 2) Smt. Indrani Chatterjee, P-140, Lake Road, Kolkata-29. ---------- Opposite Party Present : Sri S. K. Majumdar, President. Sri T.K. Bhattachatya, Member. Order No. 1 5 Dated 1 0 / 1 1 / 2 0 0 9 . Complainant Srabani Das on 4.3.08 filed a petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act against the o.p. Anu Burman and prayed for passing an order directing the o.p. to execute and register the deed of sale in respect of the premises in question in favour of the complainant on payment of cost of stamp duty and registration charge and on such failure by the o.p. the advocate on record of the complainant may be empowered to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant in respect of the flat bearing no.4A, 140, Hemanta Mukhopadhayay Sarani, P.S. Lake, Kolkata-29. Fact of the case in short is that Indrani Chaterjee and Smt. Mira Chatterjee were the full and absolute owners of premises no.140, Lake Road, P.S. Lake, kolkata-29 comprising of land of 5 cota 10 chatak and 36 sq.ft. more or less. On 29.6.1995 the said land owners authorized and fully empowered the developer Anu Burman the o.p. of the case to carry out the development of the said amount by division of the constructed area between the developer and the owners whereby the 1st and 2nd floors were allotted to the land owners and 3rd and 4th floors to the developer. On the strength of the said power of attorney and on the basis of sanctioned plan the developer constructed a new building at the said premises and by the agreement dt.16.11.1996 the developer agreed to sale the complainant’s husband Manas Kr. Das the flat no.4A on the 4th floor measuring 1487 sq.ft. together with divided portion of open tares and one covered parking space for a consideration of Rs.743500/- towards the price of land and Rs.1106500/- as cost of construction having a grand total of Rs.1850000/-. After completion of the building in question possession was given to the complainant on 15.3.1999 and since then the complainant has been residing there. The assessment was made by Kolkata Municipal Corporation and the name of the complainant was entered there as assessee no.11-090-07-0366-1. But, unfortunately on 22.3.06 complainant’s husband met with a serious road traffic accident and he received serious brain injury and his mental functions have been affected and he became physically and mentally invalid. Further, the complainant has two minor school going daughters. She is living a miserable life and finding no other alternative she obtained loan by way of giving mortgage of her flat for carrying out her household expenses and educational expenses of her daughters. She has repeatedly requested the o.p. the constituted attorney on behalf of the land owners for execution and registration of her flat in question but even in spite of her repeated requests he has not done anything and finding no other alternative the complainant has filed this case with the aforesaid prayer. It appears on perusal of the record that even in spite of service of summons upon o.p. no.1 she has not come to contest this case and it appears from the service return of o.p. no.2 Smt. Indrani Chatterjee from postal remark with the endorsement “not claimed” and the name of o.p. no.3 Smt. Mira Chatterjee has been expunged. Accordingly, the case is herd ex parte only against o.p. no.1 who is the developer of the building in question. It appears from the letter dt.15.3.09 annex-A, addressed to Manas Kr. Das, the husband of the complainant on the subject of handing over vacant and peaceful possession of the flat on the 4th floor at premises no.140, Lake Road, in good condition in terms of development agreement dt.16.11.1996. So evidently the possession of the flat in question is with the complainant. Full occupancy certificate in respect of premises no.140 Hemanta Mukhopadhyay Sarani, Kolkata-29 is annex-B. In annex-B we also find mention of completion certificate of the building in question stating therein that the building has been inspected and construction has been completed and this full occupancy certificate was granted on the basis of structural stability certificate given by structural engineer. Annex-C (series) is the property tax bill in the name of Manas Kr. Das, the husband of the complainant in respect of the flat in question. Annex-D is the discharge summary and certificate in respect of medical treatment of Manas Kr. Das, the husband of the complainant. It also includes the treatment summary. We have also perused the application for registration of marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 of the complainant Sarbani Das with Manas Kr. Das. It shows that the complainant is the legally married wife of Manas Kr. Das who is now invalid due to the road traffic accident. We have also perused the affidavit of examination in chief of the complainant and the contents of the affidavit of examination in chief are similar to the facts of the case made out in her petition of complaint. Her husband Manas Kr. Das is a bona fide purchaser of the flat in question as it appears from the agreement and he is in possession is also found from annex-A and they have been paying taxes as evident from the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Property Tax Bill, annex-C. It is found that Anu Burman o.p. no.1 is the developer of the building in question. She entered into a contract with o.p. no.2. But o.p. no.2 as it appears from the S/R of notice that she has not claimed the notice and o.p. no.3 are the land owners. O.p. no.1 is the service provider of the house in question. So o.p. no.1 is provider / developer in terms of agreement for sale dt.16.11.1996. He is bound to execute and register the deed of conveyance of the flat in question in favour of the complainant under the provisions of Section 11 of the West Bengal Regulation (of promotion of construction and transfer by promoter) Act, 1993. We have also said that the husband of the petitioner due to road traffic accident is now physically incapable. So her wife Srabani Das is now full and absolute beneficiary to receive the said conveyance. Therefore, considering the facts, circumstances, evidence both oral and documentary we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for as there is deficiency of service on the part of the o.p. Anu Burman. Hence, Ordered, that the case is allowed ex parte against the o.p. Anu Burman with costs. The o.p. Anu Burman is directed to execute and register the deed of sale in favour of the complainant Srabani Das (nee Dasgupta) wife of Manas Kr. Das in respect of the flat no.4A, premises no.P-140, Lake Road also known as Hemanta Mukhapadhyay Sarani, P.S. Lake, Kolkata-29 positively within thirty days of the date of communication of this order upon payment of cost of stamp duty and registration charges by the complain ant and in the event of such failure of the o.p. Anu Burman, the advocate on record of the complainant is entitled to execute and register the necessary conveyance in favour of the complainant in respect of the above described flat in question. The complainant is also awarded a compensation of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only and the grand total of Rs.7000/- (Rupees seven thousand) only is to be paid by the o.p. Anu Burman within thirty days from the date of communication of the order to her and in default of such compliance, it will carry interest @ 10% p.a. till full realization. Fees paid are correct. Supply copy of this order to the parties on payment of prescribed fees. ______Sd-______ _______Sd-_____ MEMBER PRESIDENT | 
