This is a complaint made by one Sri Gautam Nandy and Sri Khokan Nandy against Sri Arup Mukherjee and four others, praying for a direction upon the OPs to complete and deliver the shop rooms concerned and execute the Deed of Conveyance and further to pay interest @ 12% p.a. over the earnest money and to pay compensation and litigation cost of Rs. 2,00,000/- and Rs. 30,000/-, respectively.

Facts, in brief, are that OP No. 1 is a developer, having his business place and residence situated at 54/2, Bidhan Pally, P.S. Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700 032 and OP Nos. 2 to 5 happen to be the joint owners of a piece of land and property situated at 141/2, Prince Golam Hussian Shah Road, P.S. Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700 032.  A development agreement was executed in between OP No. 1 and OP Nos. 2 to 5 for construction of a 4-storied building.  Subsequently, by virtue of the development agreement concerned as well as a power of attorney executed in favour of the OP No. 1 by the OP Nos. 2 to 5, the OP No. 1 entered into an Agreement for Sale with the Complainants in respect of two shop rooms on the ground floor of the said building at a total consideration of Rs. 5,00,000/-.  It is further stated that the entire amount was paid to the OP no. 1 at the time of signing the Agreement for Sale.  Although the OP No. 1 was supposed to complete the shop rooms within two months of signing of the Agreement for Sale and handover the same to the Complainants, allegedly he did not do so.  Complainants visited the office of the OP No. 1 on numerous occasions and even sent legal notices for this purpose, but no positive outcome evolved.  Hence, this case.

On the basis of above facts, the complaint was admitted and notices served upon the OPs, but they did not turn up.  So, the case was heard ex parte against them.

Decision with reasons

Complainants filed Affidavit-in-Chief, wherein they have reiterated the facts stated in the petition of complaint.  Complainants also filed photocopy of an Agreement for Sale in support of their claim.

The solitary point for consideration is whether Complainants are entitled to the reliefs sought for by them.

First relief sought for by the Complainants is for a direction upon the OPs to complete and deliver possession of the shop rooms concerned in their favour. 

It appears, Complainants have banked upon the photocopy of a purported Agreement for Sale allegedly executed in between them.  A closer eye view of the same, however, caught us by surprise. 

First, the purported Agreement for Sale is not signed by the Complainants anywhere save and except on the last page although the said document bears the signature of the OP No. 1 on all pages.  Usually, all the concerned parties to a contract put their signatures on all pages to authenticate contents of the same.

Secondly, the tone and tenor of the purported Agreement for Sale does not appear to be the handiwork of OP No. 1.  Its distinct flavor/pattern of writing does give the impression that the same is prepared by the Complainants.  Usually, such agreements are prepared by the Developers.

Thirdly, it is quite unusual for a purchaser to pay the entire consideration money at one go at the time of executing the Agreement for Sale itself, as has claimed to have been done in the present case. It does raise eyebrows that Complainants paid the entire consideration money to the OP No. 1 although the shop rooms were not ready at that time.

On a deeper look into the documents placed on record, to our utter surprise, we find from the photocopy of legal notice dated 13-10-2015 that a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- was paid to the OP No. 1 and rest of the consideration was payable at the time of registration of the shop rooms, whereas it is stated in the purported photocopy of the Agreement for Sale, as well as in the petition of complainant and Affidavit in Chief that Complainants paid the entire consideration money of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the OP No. 1 at the time of execution of the said agreement. Significantly, no money receipt is filed from the side of the Complainants to show that they paid the entire sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the OP No. 1 at the time of executing the Agreement for Sale.   

Such discrepancy in the matter of payment of advance consideration money as well as the unusual features of the purported Agreement for Sale, as noted hereinabove, leaves nothing to imagination that Complainants have submitted a fabricated/forged document before us to fulfil their mala fide intention.  We are indeed horrified to see how Complainants have made false averments of facts in the pleadings and raised untenable contentions with impunity, thereby touched the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands.

Let us not forget that, parties to a case are duty bound to state in the pleadings only the true facts since the real backbone of the working of the judicial system is based on the element of trust and confidence and the purpose of obtaining a statement on oath from the parties or written pleadings is aimed at arriving at a correct decision after evaluating the respective positions.  Painful though, it has unfortunately become the order of the day, for false statements to be made in the course of judicial proceedings even on oath and attempts made to substantiate these false statements through affidavits or fabricated documents.  

Taking a grim view of such attempt on the part of the Complainants to pollute the stream of justice, as also for wasting the precious time of this Forum to deal with this false claim, we deem it fit and proper to impose a cost of Rs. 5,000/- upon the Complainants. 

Needless to say, Complainants do not deserve any of the reliefs prayed for by them for practicing fraud upon a Court of Law.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

that CC/166/2016 be and the same is dismissed ex parte against the OPs with cost.  Complainants are directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000/- to the Consumer Welfare Fund within one month hence, else legal consequences would follow.  The liability is both joint and several.