DATE OF FILING : 15.07.2016.
DATE OF S/R : 26.08.2016.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 30.12.2016.
Arati Dey,
wife of late Basudeb Dey,
residing at 18/1/1, Raja Ram Das Lane, P.O. Kadamtala,
District Howrah,
PIN 711101. .. ………………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
1. M/s. Desire Agro Resorts Development ( P ) Ltd.,
being represented by its Managing Director
viz. Ashoke Bose & Director viz. Sanjay Shaw,
having its registered office at
P85, Lake Road,
Kolkata 700029.
2. Sanjay Shaw,
the Director of
M/s. Desire Agro Resorts Development ( P ) Ltd.,
residing at P 23, Dobson Lane,
P.O. & P.S. District Howrah,
PIN 711101. ……………………….…………………….…OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak .
F I N A L O R D E R
- This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioner, Arati Dey, against the o.p. / M/s. Desire Agro Resorts Development ( P ) Ltd. represented by Managing Director, Ashoke Bose, & Director, Sanjay Shaw, o.p. no. 2, praying for direction against the o.ps. to execute and register the sale deed on giving delivery of possession in respect of the schedule mentioned property being plot of land measuring 1800 sq. ft. situated at Domjur, khatian no. 1829, dag no. 4015, P.S. Domjur by developing the same with facilities like road, bedding, water connection, sewerage, park, play ground and or refund the advance money of Rs. 2,20,000/- with 18% p.a. interest and to pay Rs. 2 lakh as compensation for physical and mental harassment and also to pay Rs. 10,000/- as litigation costs.
- The case of the petitioner is that the o.p. is the developer / owner in respect of the project “Golden Gate 23” being the property situated at Domjur. Being attracted with the advertisement of the o.p. the petitioner went to the office of the o.p. no. 1 who convinced him about the lucrative project and thus the petitioner entered into an agreement with the o.ps. for payment of a total consideration of Rs. 2 lakhs and accordingly paid Rs. 40,000/- as booking amount on 31.8.20015 and since September, 2005 to August, 2008 the petitioner paid 36 installments of Rs. 5,000/- each and thus paying Rs. 1,60,000/- and then on 08.06.2009 the petitioner paid Rs. 20,000/- to the o.p. being the cost of registration and totally paid a sum of Rs. 2,20,000/-.
- Though the o.ps. assured the petitioner that they would provide the developed land under the Golden Gate Project yet they did not complete the said project and in the month of April, 2015 the o.ps. informed the petitioner that there is delay in executing the project and they would provide 325 sq. ft. of flat per cottah to the purchaser within 120 to 150 days i.e., within 4 to 6 months. The petitioner informed the o.p. that he want to get back his money but in spite of assurance the o.ps. did not refund the money being Rs. 2,20,000/- and so this petitioner filed this case for refund of money with 18% p.a. interest and compensation and litigation costs.
- The o.ps. did not contest the case in respect of proper service of summons on them and thus the case is heard ex parte against them.
- The only point is decided here is whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- In support of his case the petitioner,Arati Dey, filed affidavit along with documents in the form of deed of agreement between the petitioner and the o.ps. proving the facts relating to the Golden Gate Project and developing the land with electricity and others and handing over the same to the petitioner and also the money receipts showing payment of Rs. 2,20,000/- by the petitioner to the o.ps. The o.ps. having failed to handover possession of the case mentioned developed land to the petitioner by way of executing and registering the sale deed, the petitioner is entitled to the alternative prayer for refund of money being Rs. 2,20,000/- with interest @ 9% since payment till recovery as all the oral and documentary evidences went unchallenged and there is nothing to disbelieve the case of the petitioner.
- Thus keeping in mind the submission of the ld. counsel for the petitioner as well as keeping in mind the contents of the petition of the petitioner and the documents filed herein this Forum finds that all these oral and documentary evidences of the petitioners went challenged and there is nothing to disbelieve the case of the petitioner who is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
In the result, the petition succeeds.
Court fee paid is correct.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. No. 228 of 2016 be and the same is allowed ex parte with costs against the o.ps. who are directed to execute and register the sale deed in favour of the petitioner in respect of the schedule mentioned property or to pay the advance sum of Rs. 2,20,000/- with 9% interest since the date of payment till realization and also to pay Rs. 20,000/- as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- out of which Rs. 5,000/- be paid to the petitioner as litigation costs and Rs. Rs. 5,000/- would be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid A/c within 30 days from the date of this order.
The whole order would be complied with within 30 days from the date of this order failing the petitioner would be at liberty to put the final order into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( B. D. Nanda )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
