West Bengal

Kolkata-II(Central)

CC/447/2019

Ashok Kumar Shaw - Complainant(s)

Versus

Biswanath Patra - Opp.Party(s)

Ramanuj Banerjee

02 Dec 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
KOLKATA UNIT - II (CENTRAL)
8-B, NELLIE SENGUPTA SARANI, 7TH FLOOR,
KOLKATA-700087.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/447/2019
( Date of Filing : 06 Nov 2019 )
 
1. Ashok Kumar Shaw
E-25,Rajdanga Nabapally,P.O.Kasba, Ward no.107,P.S.Kasba, Kolkata-700107.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Biswanath Patra
E-25,Rajdanga Nabapally,Ward no.107,P.S.Kasba, Kolkata-700107.
2. Uma Singha
E-25,Rajdanga Main Road,P.S.Kasba, Kolkata-700107.
3. Rita Patra
230,N.N.Sarkar Road, P.S.Kasba, Kolkata-700107.
4. Sujit Das
93/1R,Dr.G.S.Dutta Road, P.S.Kasba,Kolkata-700039.
5. Goutam Singh
111-J,Dr.G.S.Bose Road, P.S.Kasba,Kolkata-700039.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Swapan Kumar Mahanty PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Sahana Ahmed Basu MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Ashoke Kumar Ganguly MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:Ramanuj Banerjee, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 02 Dec 2019
Final Order / Judgement

Order No. 03        Dated :    04.12.2019

            Record is put up for passing order.

            Perused the complaint petition and the copy of agreement and other documents, annexed with the complaint petition.

            It appears that the petitioner was a tenant in respect of one room and verandah under the OP / Landlord at a monthly rental of Rs.300/- per month and the OP / Landlord entered into the development agreement and the Developer / Promoter thereafter mutually agreed with the petitioner that they will provide 200 Sq. ft. super built area on the ground floor to the petitioner and will pay Rs.1,000/- per month to the petitioner as a shifting charge and accordingly the OPs further  agreed that they will pay Rs.1,000/- to  the petitioner as a shifting charge. It also appears that for non delivery of possession of 200 Sq. ft. super built area to the petitioner, the petitioner filed this Consumer Complainant with the prayer for possession of the schedule property and execution and registration of the Sale Deed in favour of the complainant.

            On scrutiny of the Agreement dated 07.05.2018 of the parties, it appears that nowhere in the agreement made by the parties, the matter of consideration money has been mentioned for transferring of property i.e. 200 Sq. ft. of super built area to the petitioner and as such the present petitioner cannot be a consumer as defined in the CP Act, 1986. Hence, the complaint is not admitted and accordingly the same is  dismissed in limine.  

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Swapan Kumar Mahanty]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Sahana Ahmed Basu]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Ashoke Kumar Ganguly]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.