In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.193/2010
1) Sri Niranjan Nayak,
77, Ram Chandra Colony, Kolkata-700008. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) M/s. Vijay Lakshmi Promoters Pvt. Ltd.,
8, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700017.
Represented through Sri Sarat Singhania, Director,
71/1, Palm Avenue, Kolkata-700019.
2) (i) Ratna Bose,
20, Bose Para, Kolkata-700008.
(ii) Mita Das,
E/1, Ramchandra Pally, 1st Floor, Kolkata-700008.
(iii) Partha Das,
E/1, Ramchandra Pally, Ground Floor, Kolkata-700008.
(iv) Uday Ranjan Das,
D/30, Ramchandra Pally, Kolkata-700008
(v) Swapna Dutta,
Mahesweta Colony, Khejurtala More, P.O. Asansol, West Bengal.
(vi) Rita Bose,
10/45, Nagen dranath Road, Kolkata-700028. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member
Order No. 26 Dated 31/12/2012.
The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Sri Narayan Nayak against the o.ps. M/s. Delite Towers Pvt. Ltd. and others. The case of the complainant in short is that the complainant filed the instant case regarding deficiency in service in respect of housing construction. O.p. no.3(i) to 3(vi) are the owners of the land in question. O.p. no.1 is the promoter / developer and is a registered limited company and subsequently amalgamated with o.p. no.2 vide order of Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta under company petition no.222 dt.2.6.09. Complainant entered into an agreement of sale with intention of purchase a flat being GA on the ground floor on the south east portion at premises no.77, Ramchandra Colony, Kolkata-8 at a total consideration of Rs.4,75,000/-.
Complainant entered into an another agreement to purchase another flat being no.GC on the ground floor for a consideration of Rs.1,80,000/-. Complainant paid entire consideration to o.p. and on such payment o.p. handed over the possession of the flat to the complainant. Complainant since then requested the o.p. to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant but they did not do so. Complainant purchased the stamp papers and also prepared the deed of conveyance and requested the o.p. but they did not execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant.
The o.p. started demanding Rs.40,000/- i.e. Rs.20,000/- each for his flat regarding legal fees the complainant stated that the said amount was paid to the o.p. but by they did not issue the receipt and taking advantage of the same they started insisting the complainant to pay the same and refused to execute the deed of conveyance finally on the said ground which caused harassment to the complainant. Hence the case was filed by complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
In this case o.p. no.1 is the promoter / developer and a registered limited company subsequently amalgamated with o.p. no.2 vide order of the Hon’ble High Court, Kolkata under company petition no.222 dt.2.6.09 and to make it clear only o.p. no.2 had entered its appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against it and other o.ps. did not contest the case by filing w/vv and matter was heard ex parte against other o.ps. Ld. lawyer of o.p. no.2 in the course of argument submitted that the instant case is liable to be dismissed since complainant has got no cause of action to file the instant case.
Decision with reasons:-
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that the complainant booked two flats for which complainant gave entire consideration amount and it is an admitted position that the complainant is in possession of those flats and despite repeated requests by the complainant, o.ps. did not execute the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant on the plea that complainant did not pay Rs.20,000 + Rs.20,000 = Rs.40,000/- towards ld. advocate’s charges as per provisions of the agreement for sale. Now record reflects that complainant has avered that he paid the said Rs.40,000/-, but no receipt was issued by the o.ps.
On scrutiny of the entire materials on record we are of the views that complainant filed all the receipts showing payment of consideration amount but could not file any receipt showing making payment of Rs.40,000/- towards ld. advocate’s charges and we are inclined to hold that the plea of the complainant is not sustainable for non production of receipt showing payment of Rs.40,000/- towards ld. advocate’s charges. We find deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. being service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed on contest with cost against o.p. no.2 and ex parte with cost against other o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to execute the deed of conveyance in respect of two flats in question in favour of the complainant and at the same time complainant shall pay a sum of Rs.(20,000+20,000) = Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) only towards ld. advocate’s charges on the date of registration and the said sum will have to pay to the o.p.2 as per the agreement and o.p. no.2 is directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
