Judgment : Dt.5.1.2018

Shri S. K. Verma, President

            This is a complaint made by one Smt. Annapurna Chatterjee, wife of Sri T.K.Chaterjee, residing at 84A, Majhi Para Road, P.O.-Thakurpukur, P.S.-Haridevpur, Kolkata-700 063 against M/s Biswas Construction, a proprietorship firm represented by its proprietor Sri Ananda Narayan Biswas, son of Sri Kabindra Narayan Biswas, having its office at L.I.G., 48/2, Sarsuna Housing Estate, Phase-I, P.S.-Sarsuna, Kolkata-700 060, 24 Parganas (South), OP No.1, Sri Ajay Das, son of Sri Manindra Nath Das, residing at 16, Dr. A.K.Paul Road, P.S.-Parnasree, Kolkata-700 060, 24 Parganas (South), OP No.2, Sri Subir Das, son of Sri Surya Kumar Das residing at 94/N, Dr. A.K.Paul Road, P.S.-Parnasree, Kolkata-700 060, 24 Parganas (South), OP No.3, Sri Santu Das, son of late Bimal Chandra Biswas residing at 511, Dr. A.K.Paul Road, P.S.-Parnasree, Kolkata-700 060, 24 Parganas (South), OP No.4 and Sri Nirmal Sharma (Father’s name not known), 522, Diamond Harbor Road, Kolkata-700 034, 24 Parganas (South), OP No.5 praying for a direction upon the O.P. for restraining the OP and their men and agents from selling, transferring and assigning the said flat situated in the new building under construction at 891, Ho Chi Min Sarani, being the postal address 511, Dr. A.K.Paul Road, P.S.-Parnasree, Kolkata-700 060.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant Smt. Annapurna Chatterjee is upper middle class lady and is residing at 84A, Majhi Para Road, P.O.-Thakurpukur, P.S.-Haridevpur, Kolkata-700 063. OP No.1 M/s Biswas Construction a proprietorship firm represented by its proprietor Sri Ananda Narayan Biswas, son of Sri Kabindra Narayan Biswas, having its office at L.I.G., 48/2, Sarsuna Housing Estate, Phase-I, P.S.-Sarsuna, Kolkata-700 060, 24 Parganas (South), who is engaged by the OP No.2 to 4 for developing the land measuring more or less 4 cottahs, 0 chittkas 00 sq.ft. lying and situated at Municipal premises No.891, Ho Chi Min Sarani, being the postal address 511, Dr. A.K.Paul Road, P.S.-Parnasree, Kolkata-700 060, 24 Parganas (South), and to construct a ground plus three storied building. OP No.5, Sri Nirmal Sharma, is engaged by the proprietor Sri Ananda Narayan Biswas of OP No.1, M/s Biswas Construction to erect the new building under his supervision.

            The Complainant was looking for a suitable flat in the Parnasree locality and learnt about the aforesaid new proposed building to be constructed in the said area. Therefore, she approached to the OP No.1 who offered to sell a flat to be constructed. Complainant found that the flat is within her budget and being impressed by the representative of OP No.1, Complainant became interested in the said offer to own a residential accommodation. Accordingly, Complainant entered into an agreement on 30.11.2015 with the OPs to purchase a self contained ground floor flat, measuring 517 sq.ft. super built up area at a price of Rs.12,40,800/- @ Rs.2,400/- per sq.ft. Complainant paid a total sum of Rs.10,00,000/- on or before the execution of the agreement as booking money. According to the terms of the said agreement, OP No.1 was under obligation to built the said flat and handover possession of the same by 10 months or any time before the aforesaid time from the date of the agreement i.e. by 30.9.2016 but the same was not done. Complainant paid major part of the consideration of Rs.10,00,000/- and only Rs.2,40,800/- was due to be paid. Thereafter, Complainant made several representations to the OP and asked them to perform their duties and obligations as stipulated. But, OPs did not oblige. Complainant learnt that in collusion with Sri Ananda Narayan Biswas, the proprietor of OP No.1 is now showing and trying to sell the flat booked by the Complainant to some third party illegally and when the Complainant approached the OP No.5 not to indulge in such illegal act, the Complainant was threatened. The OPs have no right to do so. So, Complainant filed this case.

            OPs did not contest the case by filing written version and so the case is heard ex-parte against it.

Decision with reasons

            Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief wherein he has reiterated the facts mentioned in the complaint petition.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.

            On perusal of the agreement for sale, it appears that there was an agreement between the Complainant and the developer as per which Complainant was to hand over the flat. Complainant has prayed for an interim order for restraining the OP in not selling the flat. Since the allegation remained unrebutted and unchallenged, Complainant is entitled to the relief of injunction.

Hence,

ordered

              CC/522/2017 and the same is allowed ex-parte.

              OPs are directed not to transfer the flat mentioned in the schedule of the complaint to any third party.