DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS ,
AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. 105_ OF ___2017
DATE OF FILING : 11.8.2017 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: 24.01.2018
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Subrata Sarker
COMPLAINANT : 1. Sri Nirmal Kumar Saha, son of late Chandi Prasad Saha.
2.Smt. Baijanti Rani Saha, wife of Sri Nirmal Kumar Saha
Both of Jasoda Bhawan, 167G, Rashbehari Avenue, P.S Gariahat, Kolkata – 19.
-VERSUS -
O.P/O.Ps : 1. Smt. Anima Majumdar,wife of late Ashutosh Majumdar of Dhalua, Gartia, P.O Fartabad, P.S Sonarpur, Kolkata-152.
2. The Director, M/s Dwapar Estates Pvt. Ltd. at 46C, Chowranghee Road, 9th floor, Everest Building, P.S Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata – 71.
_____________________________________________________________________
J U D G E M E N T
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
Frustrated by the constant refusal of the O.Ps to effect a deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants , complainants have come up before this Forum with the filing of the instant case under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 ,alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps for not effecting execution and registration of the deed of conveyance in their favour.
The facts leading to the filing of the instant case may be epitomised as follows.
One Chandi Prasad Saha was the father of the complainant-1 ; he is no more at present. He along with complainant no.2 wanted to purchase a flat measuring 477 sq.ft (Rectified vide order No. 8, dt.16/02/2018) described succinctly in first and second schedule to the sale agreement for a consideration price of Rs.4,05,450/- from the O.P-2 ,developer. The O.P-1 is the land owner who has inherited the land after demise of her husband Ashutosh Majumder. On different dates and lastly on 20.3.2014 the consideration price of Rs.4,05,450/- has been paid to the O.P-2 who agreed to construct a flat for the complainant on the schedule property. Flat was constructed in terms of the agreement by the O.P-2 ; but the deed of conveyance was not made in favour of the complainants. Possession of the flat was handed over to the complainants on 20.3.2014 by the O.P-2. Now the complainant prays for issuing a direction to the O.P-2 so that he executes and registers a deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants and also for payment of Rs.20,000/- as litigation cost and Rs.1 lac for mental agony ,inconvenience ,anxiety suffered by the complainant. Hence, this case.
The O.Ps have not appeared in the case despite service of notice upon them and ,therefore, the case is proceeding exparte against them.
Evidence in chief is fled by the complainant and the same is kept in the record.
I S S U E S
- Are the O.Ps guilty of deficiency in service in not effecting registration of the flat in favour of the complainants?
- Are the complainants entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Issue no.1 and 2 :
Discussions on both the issues are synchronized for the sake of convenience.
Now to see whether the O.Ps have committed any deficiency in service by not effecting registration of the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants.
The complainant no.1 is the sole legal heir of Chandi Prasad Saha who signed the sale agreement dated 15.5.2007 . The sale agreement was executed by and between the complainant -2 and Chandi Prasad Saha on one hand and the developer i.e O.P-2 and Ashutosh Majumder, the husband of O.P-1 , on the other. A photocopy of this agreement has been filed by the complainants and the same is in the record. A perusal of this agreement reveals in clause “T” at page 15 thereof that O.Ps agreed to effect a deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants within six months of handing over possession of the flats to the purchasers. It is the case of the complainants that possession of the flat was handed over to them on 20.3.2014 and it is so stated in the affidavit in chief filed by the complainants. This evidence of the complainants has remained un-rebutted. A perusal of the clause of the agreement as referred to above and the fact of handing over the flat to the complainant on 20.3.2014 reveals that the O.Ps have committed deficiency in service by not effecting deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants within six months of the delivery of possession to the complainants. Regards being had to this aspect , we feel no hesitation to say that the O.Ps have committed deficiency in service by not registering the sale deed in favour of the complainants and that, such negligence on the part of the O.Ps, particularly O.P-2 i.e the developer, has caused tremendous mental agony and anxiety to the complainants. The O.P-2 will have to pay compensation ,therefore, to the complainants along with the litigation cost.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is allowed exparte against the O.Ps with cost which is assessed to be Rs.10,000/-.
The cost is to be paid by the O.P-2 only. He will also have to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for not effecting registration of sale deed in favour of the complainants within the time agreed upon between the parties.
The O.P nos. 1 and 2 are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in relation to the schedule flat described in first and second schedule to the sale agreement dated 15.5.2007 within a month of this order ,failing which the complainants are at liberty to effect registration of the sale deed with the help of the machinery of this Forum.
The O.P-2 is also directed to make payment of the litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- and compensation amount of Rs.50,000/- as referred to above within a month of this order, failing which, the compensation amount will bear interest @12% p.a till full realization.
Let a free copy of this order be given to the parties concerned at once.
President
We / I agree.
Member Member
Dictated and corrected by me
President
The judgment in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is allowed exparte against the O.Ps with cost which is assessed to be Rs.10,000/-.
The cost is to be paid by the O.P-2 only. He will also have to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- for not effecting registration of sale deed in favour of the complainants within the time agreed upon between the parties.
The O.P nos. 1 and 2 are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in relation to the schedule flat described in first and second schedule to the sale agreement dated 15.5.2007 within a month of this order ,failing which the complainants are at liberty to effect registration of the sale deed with the help of the machinery of this Forum.
The O.P-2 is also directed to make payment of the litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- and compensation amount of Rs.50,000/- as referred to above within a month of this order, failing which, the compensation amount will bear interest @12% p.a till full realization.
Let a free copy of this order be given to the parties concerned at once.
Member Member President
