IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BANKURA.
C. C. No.54 / 2016.
Present :
1. Abdul Kuddus……………………….Hon’ble President.
2. Dr. Tapan Kr. Tripathi…………….Ld. Member.
Smt. Madhabi Mahanti (Patra), D/o Debipada Mahanti, R/o Pratap Bagan (North), Bankura, P.O., P.S. & Dist.-Bankura. …………..……….................Complainant.
Versus
Hahnemann Housing & Development Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Regd. No.U45203 WB. 2004 PtOO 98037) 3/3 Poddar nagar, Kol – 700068. @ Director & Owner Viz. Sri Karunamoy Sinha, S/o Late Gopal Ch. Sinha, R/O P – 70, Sagarbhanga Colony, P.S. – Coke-Oven, Durgapur, Dist. Burdwan.………………………..Opposite Parties.
JUDGEMENT
Dt. 21.03.2017.
Fact of the case of the Complainant in short is that in response to advertisement made by the O.P. Company this Complainant booked a Plot no.219 by paying Rs.1,20,000/- after issuing a cheque on 04-04-2012. Thereafter, this O.P. issued Money Receipt as well as Booking Certificate on 02-05-2015. After that an agreement was made by Complainant and O.P. on 28-12-2012 and total price of the case property was fixed at Rs.6,00,000/-. This Complainant advanced Rs.3,73,326/- in total but this O.P. failed to act as per terms & conditions of the contract. So, this Complainant has filed this case and prays for refund of Rs.3,73,326/- paid by her to the O.P. along with interest @ 8% p.a.
Complainant also made further prayer to award Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation. Notice was served upon the O.P. but none appears on behalf of the O.P. to contest this case. So, this case was heard exparte.
In this case Complainant submitted her affidavit evidence which has been treated as evidence of P.W. 1.
The following documents are marked as exhibit :-
1) Exhibit – 1 Xerox copy of agreement.
2) Exhibit – 2 Xerox copy of application for booking plot.
3) Exhibit – 3 series Xerox copy of Money Receipts.
Page no.1/3.
C. C. No.54 / 2016.
4) Exhibit – 4 Xerox copy of Statement of Bank Accounts.
5) Exhibit – 5 Xerox copy of Bank Pass Book.
6) Exhibit – 6 Lawyer’s notice with postal receipt.
Points for determinations.
1) Is the Complaint maintainable ?
2) Whether there was any unfair trade practice as alleged by the Complainant ?
3) Whether the Complainant is entitled to relief as prayed for ?
Decisions with reasons.
We have carefully gone through the affidavit evidence of Complainant P.W. 1 and the documents. It reveals from exhibit – 1 that this is an agreement for sale made by the O.P. and Complainant and contents of agreement corroborating the evidence of P.W. 1 that there was a contract in between the O.P. and Complainant for purchasing case Plot No.219 measuring three (3) Katthas under Mouja – Bikna, Dag no.512 and Khatian no.956 in the District Bankura.
Exhibit – 2 is the documents which is application for booking of plot by Complainant.
Exhibit – 3 series are the documents showing payment of Rs.1,20,000/-, Rs.13,333/- and Rs.26,666/- by the Complainant to O.P. It also reveals from exhibit – 4 which is a Bank Account Statement stands in the name of O.P. Company. It reveals from the statement that Rs.3,73,326/- were credited in the account of the O.P. Company and as per claim of the Complainant that this amount was paid by the Complainant to the O.P. company for purchasing the case properties.
We also do not find any reason to disbelieve the unchallenged the testimony of the P.W. – 1 as well as unchallenged contents of documents like agreement for sale, payment of Rs.3,73,326/- by the Complainant to O.P. Company for purchasing the case properties. So we find that Complainant has been able to prove that O.P. Company has failed to execute the registered deed of sale of the case property in favour of the Complainant as per terms & conditions of argument for sale.
So, we hold that this Complainant paid Rs.3,73, 326/- to the O.P. Company for purchasing the case property and O.P. Company fails to execute sale deed in favour of the Complainant as per terms & conditions of the agreement. So, it is a clear case of unfair trade practice.
Page no.2/3.
C. C. No.54 / 2016.
So, Complainant is entitled to return Rs.3,73,326/- paid to O.P. / Company and Compensation.
Considering the materials on record we are of the opinion if interest @ 8 % p.a. on amount paid by Complainant and Rs.10,000/- as Compensation and Cost is awarded then none would be prejudiced.
Considering the above facts & circumstances we like to award Rs.10,000/- as Compensation and cost and interest @ 8% p.a. on the amount paid by the Complainant to O.P. / Company.
In the result this complaint succeeds.
Hence, it is
Ordered
That the Complaint Case No.54 of 2016 be and same is hereby allowed exparte.
O.P. Company is hereby directed to pay back Rs.3,73,326/- along with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of filing of this case till its full realization to this Complainant by thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of copy of this Judgement; failing which Complainant is at liberty to realize the same with due course of law.
Rs.10,000/- is hereby also awarded as Compensation as well as cost of litigation in favour of the Complainant.
O.P. Company is hereby further directed to pay the amount awarded above as Compensation as well as cost to Complainant by thirty (30) days from the date of receipt copy of the Judgement.
Let a plain copy of this Judgement be given to Complainant and another copy of Judgement be sent to the O.P. by registered post with A/D free of cost.
