This is a complaint made by one Rajesh Ahuja against Chandan Rakshit and seven other OPs, praying for a direction upon the OPs to complete the flat and handover possession of the suit premises and execute a Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Complainant and for compensation for a sum of Rs. 2,60,000/- and litigation cost Rs. 20,000/-.
Facts in brief are that OP No. 1 is a developer and OP Nos. 2 to 8 are co-owners in respect of a land measuring more or less 7 Cottahs 8 chittaks and 22 sft. being Premises No. 196/165, Vidya Sagar Sarani, corresponding to mailing address 2, Purba Para, James Long Sarani, P.O. & P.S. Thakurpukur, Kolkata – 700 063. Complainant entered into an Agreement for Sale with the OP No. 1 on 14-08-2012 to purchase one self contained flat measuring more or less 900 sft. super built up area situated on the Southern portion of the suit premises at a total consideration of Rs. 17,10,000/-, payable in installments in terms of the said agreement. The agreement was signed by the OP No. 1 and the Complainant. As the Complainant paid major portion of the total consideration money, he used to remind the OP No. 1 to complete the flat as per Agreement for Sale and sanctioned building plan and also requested him to make registered deed in his favour, but of no use. Complainant came to know that OP No. 1 is bringing new customers and trying to sell the flat to a third party at a higher consideration. So, the Complainant filed this case.
OP No. 1 despite receiving notice did not turn up to defend its case.
OP Nos. 2 to 8 filed written version and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It is contended by these OPs that they have no knowledge about the Agreement for Sale that the Complainant allegedly entered into with the OP No. 1.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed Affidavit-in-Chief, wherein he reiterated the allegations as made out in the complaint petition. Against this, OP No. 2 to 8 filed questionnaire, to which the Complainant filed reply. OP Nos. 2 to 8 also filed Affidavit in-Reply against the questionnaire of the Complainant.
Main point for determination is whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as he has prayed for.
On perusal of the Affidavit-in-Chief filed by OP No. 6 (although it is mentioned as OPW-1), it appears that he has asserted that he has got no knowledge about the so called Agreement-for Sale allegedly executed in between the Complainant and the OP No. 1.
In the present case, Complainant has mainly sought for relief from the OP No. 1. According to the Complainant though the OP No. 1 was supposed to handover peaceful khas possession of the schedule property and facilitate registration of the same in his favour, he reneged on his commitment and is reportedly in the process of selling out the schedule flat to a third party at a higher consideration money. From the photocopies of money receipts, it appears that major portion of the consideration money has been paid by the Complainant to the OP No. 1. According to the payment schedule set out in the Agreement for Sale, out of total Rs. 11,09,100/-, that the Complainant was supposed to pay to the OP No. 1 prior to execution of Conveyance Deed, the Complainant has already paid Rs. 10,65,900/- and he is willing to pay the balance of the consideration money. On the other hand, in terms of the said Agreement for Sale, the OP No. 1 was under obligation to handover possession of the flat and execute the Deed of Conveyance within 31-12-2012, which apparently gone for a toss. This is a clear act of deficiency in service without any iota of doubt. However, since the OP Nos. 2 to 8 did not enter into any agreement with the Complainant in respect of the schedule flat, in our considered opinion, they cannot be asked to provide any relief to the Complainant.
On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case from practical aspect, we are of view that OP No. 1 should be directed to return the amount received by him along with compensation and litigation cost.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
that CC/82/2015 be and the same is allowed ex parte against the OP No. 1 in part and dismissed on contest against the OP Nos. 2 to 8. OP No. 1 is directed to pay back Rs. 10,65,900/- to the Complainant within two months from the date of this order, i.d., the amount shall carry interest @ 10% p.a. OP No. 1 is also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and another sum of Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost to the Complainant within the aforesaid stipulated time frame.