Judgment dated 24-05-2015

            This is a complaint made by one Shri Manas Kumar Ghosh against Shri Monoranjan Dutta Banik praying for direction upon the OP to complete the incomplete work of the said flat which is mentioned in the schedule at 19B, Gobindapur Road. Alternatively to pay cost of the incomplete work to the Complainant and Rs. 1,00,000/- for compensation for harassment, mental agony and deficiency of service and also for a direction to OP to take completion certificate from the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and hand over to the Complainant and to pay the entire tax and rent till the date of receiving the completion certificate.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant is a senior citizen residing at the flat mentioned in the cause title. OP is a owner in respect of land measuring an area of 3 Cottahs 2 Chittacks and 29 Sq. ft. lying at Mouza Gobindapur under Lake Police Station. OP constructed a building through Amitave Bhattacharjee, Developer who is dead. Complainant  entered an agreement for sale on 1^st February, 2010 for purchasing a residential flat measuring about 690 Sq. ft. situated at 19B, Gobindapur Road. Kolkata-700 045. Complainant purchased this flat by a Deed of Conveyance  dated 23.7.2010. OP did not complete the terms and conditions of the agreement. Complainant on many occasions requested the OP to complete the incomplete work. On 14.10.2015 Complainant issued a notice to the OP to complete the drainage of the building, sanction from the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, to complete the common areas, boundary wall, outside painting and electrical wiring. But despite several request OP did not complete the work mentioned above. So, Complainant files this petition praying for completion of the work.

            On the basis of the above facts the complaint was admitted and notices were served upon the OPs. OP appear by filing vakalatnama but did not file written version and contest the case. So, the case was heard ex-parte.

Decisions with reasons

            Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief and made submissions in favour of his case on the date of argument.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to reliefs which he has prayed for.

            On perusal of the affidavit-in-chief filed by the Complainant it appears that he entered into an agreement for sale on 1^st February, 2010 and purchased the flat on 23^rd July, 2010 on the strength of registered sale deed. Thereafter, he has started living in the flat. Suddenly after about 5 years he issued notice to the OP for completing the works which were allegedly not completed at the time of purchase.

            The law is settled that the complaint has to be filed within 2 years of the cause of action i.e. since July, 2010 when OP made registration of the deed in favour of the Complainant. Here it is noteworthy that developer has already died. In the circumstances it is difficult to say as to whether in 2010 the works were complete or not and why Complainant waited for 5 years. Despite execution of the sale deed in his favour.

            Complainant has prayed for a direction upon the OP to complete the incomplete work but has not made out clear as to which works are incomplete and whether those were incomplete in 2010 and got damaged during 5 years and requires completion.

            So, the prayer appears to be vague and cannot be allowed. Since the main prayer is not fit to be allowed; the question of direction for compensation and litigation cost do not arise. So far as the procuring of completion certificate is concerned in our view if the same is not being done it is the owner’s liability particularly when developer has died.         

            Complainant failed to prove the allegation made out in the complaint and he is not entitled to any relief as prayed for.

            Hence,

O R D E R E D

            CC/62/2015 and the same is dismissed ex-parte.