Judgment : Dt.5.1.2018
Shri S. K. Verma, President
This is a complaint made by Amal Karmakar, son of late Manick Chandra Karmakar, and Sikha Karmakar, wife of Amal Karmakar, both residing at 156, Sreerampur Road, Goria, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 084 against Mr. Tarak Karmakar, son of Hirendranath Karmakar of 55A, Prince Bakhtiar Shah Road,Kolkata-700 033 and also residing at 366, Banamali Banerjee Road, PS.-Haridevpur, Kolkata-700 082 praying for an order directing the O.P. to register the deed of conveyance in respect of schedule flat and an order directing the OP to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for mental harassment, agony and unfair trade practice and litigation cost of Rs.70,000/- and another compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-.
Facts in brief are that Complainants are the purchasers in respect of a residential flat measuring about 600 sq.ft. situated on the 1st floor, Flat No. South-East Corner at premises No.41/151A, Chand Mohammad Road, P.S.-Jadavpur. OP, the developer, entered into a joint venture agreement with land-owner – Sri Tapan Karmakar, Sri Tarun Karmakar, Sri Arun Karmakar and Sri Barun Karmakar all sons of late Panchanan Karmakar of 99A, Pallisree, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-92 for a G+3 storied building. OP started construction as per sanction plan and in terms of the development agreement OP was to try to sell out the developer’s allocation and knowing that the Complainants proposed the OP for purchasing the flat. Thereafter, Complainants entered into an agreement for sale with the OP on 21.10.2003 for purchase of the above mentioned flat at a consideration of Rs.2,40,000/-. After execution of the agreement for sale between OP and the Complainants, the OP received the entire consideration amount on various dates. On 21.10.2003 OP handed over the physical possession of the incomplete flat without completing all construction works in respect of the said building. Complainants immediately after receiving possession asked for execution of the deed of conveyance, but OP only assured. After lapse of long time Complainant approached the developer for execution of the deed of conveyance in their favour. But they refused to execute the same. Complainant is entitled to get deed of conveyance registered in his favour. Complainants are aged persons. Thereafter the Complainants contacted the lawyer and issued a legal notice. But that also did not work. So, Complainant filed this case.
OP after receiving notice did not appear to contest so the case is heard ex-parte.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief.
Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
On perusal of the affidavit-in-chief, it appears that Complainant has reiterated the allegation mentioned in the complaint petition. Further, it appears that since OP did not contest the allegations made by the Complainant and so allegation remained unrebutted and unchallenged and so Complainants are entitled to the reliefs as prayed for. Further, it appears from copy of the agreement for sale that there was an agreement for sale between developer, owner and the Complainants, wherein the OPs had agreed to sell the flat in favour of the Complainants.
Hence,
ordered
CC/400/2017 and the same is allowed in part ex-parte. OP is directed to make the deed of conveyance in favour of the Complainants of the schedule flat within three months of this order. OP is directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.30,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- within the above mentioned period, otherwise this amount of Rs.40,000/- shall carry interest @ 10% p.a.
