DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
M.A. No-165/2019
Arising out of C.C. NO- 271/2018
Date of Filing: Date of Disposal:
19.03.2019 25.03.2019
Complainant:- Sri. Tapan Kumar Das,
S/o Late Upendra Nath Das, Sudha Apartment,
Flat no-1A, 1st Floor, C-57, Amarabati,
P.O.-Sodepur, P.S.-Khardah,
District-North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700 110.
=Vs=
Opposite Parties:- 1. M/s. A.B. Construction,
C.R. Road, P.O.-Natagarh, P.S.-Ghola,
District-North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700 113.
Represented by its Propreitors-Sri. Ajoy Dey &
Sri. Biswanath Das.
2. Sri. Ajoy Dey, S/o Late Jiban Krishna Dey,
Tarun Pally, 2/21, Purbapally, P.O.-Natagarh,
P.S.-Ghola, District-North 24 Parganas,
Kolkata-700 113.
3. Sri. Biswanath Das,
S/o Mahendra Chandra Das, A.R. Nagar,
P.O.-Natagarh, P.S.-Ghola,
District-North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700 113.
4. Sri. Dulal Chandra Saha,
S/o Late Rabindra Nath Saha, Natagarh Main Road
(Panchabati), P.O.-Natagarh, P.S.-Ghola,
District-North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700 113.
5. Sri. Dilip Kumar Saha,
S/o Late Rabindra Nath Saha, Natagarh Main Road,
(Panchabati), P.O.-Natagarh, P.S.-Ghola,
District-North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700 113.
6. Sri. Bholanath Saha,
S/o Late Rabindra Nath Saha, Natagarh Main Road,
(Panchabati), P.O.-Natagarh, P.S.-Ghola,
District-North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700 113.
7. Sri. Bapi Saha,
S/o Late Rabindra Nath Saha, Natagarh Main Road,
(Panchabati), P.O.-Natagarh, P.S.-Ghola,
District-North 24 Parganas, Kolkata-700 113.
P R E S E N T :- Sri. Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay…………...President.
:- Smt. Silpi Majumder ………………………………Member.
:- Smt. Monisha Shaw …………………………………Member.
ORDER No- 05
This order is arising out of the MA being no-165/2019 filed by the OP-4, 6 and 7 in the consumer complaint no-271/2018 challenging the maintainability of the complaint.
Cont……………2
:2:
M.A. No-165/2019
Arising out of C.C. NO- 271/2018
In the application the OP-4, 6 and 7 have stated that the Complainant has already received an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in cash and one cheque of Rs.1,50,000/- in lieu of his admitted payment of Rs.1,50,000/- which was paid by him for the purpose of booking the subject flat. But the Complainant did not disclose the said fact before this Ld. Forum. The Complainant had surrendered his entire right over the flat which the money receipt dated 25.12.2018 is clearly revealed as he has received the amount as per his claim against payment of Rs.1,50,000/-. As the OPs have refunded the entire amount as per the claim of the Complainant, hence this complaint cannot be maintainable. The said OPs have also prayed for waiving the cost as imposed on these OPs due to delay in filing the written version. According to the OP-4, 6 and 7 if this application is not allowed, their interest will be seriously prejudiced and the OPs have prayed for allowing this application.
Upon receipt of this application the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant has raised vehement objection stating that though he received an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- in cash, but till date the OPs did not refund a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- inspite of their commitment. According to the Complainant this application is liable to be dismissed having no merit. Regarding payment of cost the Complainant has argued that as the OP-4, 6 and 7 did not file their written version within the statutory period, hence the Ld. Forum has correctly imposed the said cost as per Law.
Upon perusing the content of the application filed by the OP-4, 6 and 7, verbal objection thereto as raised by the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant and hearing argument as advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the contesting parties it is seen by us that the money receipt denotes that the Complainant had received a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in cash from the OPs and the OPs have paid an account payee cheque in fvaour of the Complainant to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/-. But the said cheque reveals that such type of cheque became obsolete now-a days as there is not CTC number as well as no account number. During argument the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant as well as the Complainant has stated that the bank has refused to accept the said cheque for encashment. Therefore as the OPs have paid the questioned cheque being obsolete one, hence we cannot hold that the OPs have paid the entire amount. For the abovementioned reason we are not in a position to allow the application filed by the OP-4, 6 and 7 at this juncture.
Hence it is ordered that the MA being no-165/2019 is hereby dismissed on contest without any cost.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR, 2005.
Member Member President
Dictated & Corrected by
