DATE OF FILING                    :     08.07.2016.

DATE OF S/R                            :      16.08.2016.

DATE OF  ORDER                  :      24.01.2017.

Sri Ramkrishna Paul,

son of late Nirapada Paul,  

residing at village & P.O. Lakshmanpur,  

District Hooghly,

PIN 712404. . …………….………………………….…………… COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

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,

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

1.  This is an application U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) filed by the complainant, Sri Ramkrishna Paul,  against the o.ps., M/s. Desire Agro Resorts Development ( P ) Ltd. represented by its Managing Director, Ashoke Bose, and Director, Sanjay  Shaw, with registered office at P85, Lake Road,  praying for a  direction upon the o.ps. to execute and register the sale deed after giving delivery of possession in respect of the schedule mentioned property being plot of land measuring 2160 sq. ft. in khatian no. 1978, dag no. 4029, P.S. Domjur, after developing the property with electricity, road, bedding, water connection, sewerage, park, play ground and other amenities or to refund the advance money of  Rs. 2,75,000/- with 18% interest till realization of the advance money and also to pay Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation costs.       

2. The case of the petitioners is that the o.p.  developer developed project “Golden Gate 220” and being allured by the advertisement the petitioner made an agreement with the o.p. no. 1 making payment of Rs. 2,55,000/- being Rs. 1,53,000/- as cost of land and Rs. 1,02,000/- being development cost except making payment of Rs. 20,000/- for registration. The petitioner was to make the above payment by paying Rs. 51,000/- at the time of agreement and balance amount in 36 monthly installments of Rs. 5,667/- each.

3. As per agreement the petitioner paid Rs. 51,000/-  as booking money at the time of agreement on 17.01.2006 and on and from March, 2006 to February,2009 paid Rs. 2,04,012/- on 02.012.2009 and paid Rs. 20,000/- for cost of registration. At the time of agreement the o.p. told that they would complete the development work within 3 to 5 years from the date of agreement i.e., on or before October,2011 and delivered the plot to the petitioner.  The o.p. assured that in the event of failure to make such transaction,  the period would be extended for another three years i.e., till October, 2014 and after expiry of the extended period the petitioner would be entitled to withdraw the invested amount. There was no delivery of possession within October, 2011 and later on October, 2014 and no satisfactory answer from the o.p. the petitioner requested the o.p. to refund the advance but the o.p. did not return the same and lastly on 18.3.2016 when the petitioner approached the o.p. then the o.p. no. 2 told that he was not refund the money and hearing the same the petitioner made several attempts to recover the same but in vain and then he filed this case.     

4. The o.ps. though served with notices did not appear in the case and thus the matter is heard ex parte against them.

5. The only point to be decided here is whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for ?

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

6. In support of their case the petitioner filed the agreement made between him and the Desire Agro Resorts Development ( P ) Ltd. dated 10.02.2006 showing truth behind the averments made by the petitioner in support of his case and also filing further documents showing payment of 36 installments as well as the advance amount of Rs. 51,000/-. The oral evidence of the petitioner as well as the documents filed by the petitioner proved his case ex party as all these documents went unchallenged and there is nothing to disbelieve the case of the petitioner who is entitled to the relief as prayed for because the documents are found legal and valid tallying with the case of the petitioner.    

In the result, the application succeeds.  

            Court fee paid is correct.

      Hence,     

           O     R     D      E      R      E        D   

      That the C. C. Case No. 220  of 2016 ( HDF 220 of 2016 )  be  and the same is allowed ex parte with costs against the o.ps. 

      The petitioner is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for. The o.ps. are directed to refund  Rs. 2,75,000/- which was paid as advance with  9% interest from the date of receipt of money and also to pay Rs. 30,000/- out of which Rs. 10,000/- would go in favour of petitioner as compensation and rest Rs. 20,000/- would go in favour of the Consumer Legal Aid Account and the o.ps. are to pay further Rs. 5,000/- as litigation costs.

      All the above payments will be made within 30 days from the date of this order failing the petitioners would be at liberty to put the order in execution.

                   Supply the copies of the order to the petitioners, free of costs.

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    B. D.  Nanda   )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F., Howrah.