SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA, MEMBER
Today is fixed for passing order.
Upon perusal of entire materials on record, it appears to us the instant case has been filed under Section 47 of the CP Act, 2019 by Smt. Sarmistha Maitra and Smt. Minati Mukherjee being the legal heirs of one of the co-owners, namely, Amal Kumar Mukhopadhyay alias Amal Mukherjee, since deceased. Late Amal Kumar Mukherjee along with other co-owners of the property namely, Sri Saikat Mukherjee, Smt. Reba Mukherjee, Sri Malay Mukherjee and Smt. Krishna Sannyal entered into a Development Agreement on 21.06.2014 with the OPs No. 1, 2 & 3 to develop their property in question. It appears from the record that at the time of entering into the Development Agreement, the valuation of the land was Rs.1,15,56,239/- . the valuation of the property has been assessed by office of D.S.R.- IV South 24 Parganas, government of West Bengal as on 10.07.2014. Therefore, the entire consideration of the land is Rs.1,15,56,239/- on behalf all the landowners of the property. Ld. Advocate for the complainants has submitted before us that Sri Saikat Mukherjee and Smt. Reba Mukherjee were impleaded as owners being legal heirs of Sri Arun Mukherjee, since deceased and originally, there were four land owners and after expiry of Arun Kumar Mukherjee, his son and wife were impleaed as legal heirs of late Arun Kumar Mukherjee in the Development Agreement being the owners. It appears to us in the Second Schedule of the Development Agreement, no specification has been mentioned towards owners’ allocation, only it has been mentioned that owners will get 40% built up area from each floor proportionate from the front and back portion out of total F.A.R including ground floor along with proportionate share in the common facilities and amenities in each floor of the constructed area in the building to be constructed on the premises along with monetary consideration. Originally there were four landowners of the property in question subsequently after expiry of Shri Arun Kumar Kukherjee his wife and son were impleaded in the Development Agreement. Therefore, to assess the value of consideration in respect of the present complainants, we have to consider one-fourth of total land value i.e., Rs.1,15,56,239/- which comes to Rs.28,89,059.75/-. To assess the consideration of each landowner it comes to Rs.28,89,059.75/- which is below the pecuniary jurisdiction of State Commission as per Section 47 of CP Act, 2019. In the instant case, both the complainants are the co-owners of one-fourth property in question. Therefore, the instant case lacks the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission as per CP Act, 2019.
Ld. Advocate for the complainant has cited the judgments passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Faqir Chand Gulati vs. Uppal Agencies Pvt. Ltd. and the judgment passed by Hon’ble National Commission in Nanda Dulal Mitra Vs. Ashit Mukherjee @ Keshab Mukherjee. In both the judgments, the Hon’ble Apex Court and the Hon’ble National Commission have dealt with the valuation of the land and which is the consideration for the land owner. The judgments have not dealt with the issue where the number of landowners are more than one and the case has not been filed by all the land owners, then what would be the consideration of the co-sharer of the land.
In our considered view, in the instant case, all the landowners have not filed the complaint case. Therefore, to assess the valuation of the suit, the proportionate share of the complainants to be considered as paid consideration by the complainant as per C.P. Act, 2019. Therefore, the judgments cited by Ld. Advocate for the complainants are not applicable in this case.
Accordingly, the instant case is dismissed being not admitted on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction.
However, the complainants are at liberty to file the case before the appropriate authority for the selfsame cause of action.
The complaint case is, thus, disposed of, accordingly.
Let a copy of this order be supplied to the complainants free of cost.
