Order No. 18 dt. 18/09/2017
The fact of the case according to the complainant, in brief, is that the complainant underwent an agreement dated 21.09.2005 with M/s Desire Agro Resorts Development (P) Ltd, P-85 Lake Road, Kolkata-700 029 for purchasing a plot of land with it’s development measuring 1800 Sq. Ft., situated at Mouza- Bhasa, Dag No. 224, Khatian No. 190, 24 Parganas (South) against a total consideration of Rs.3,25,000/-. Complainant paid Rs.65,000/- to the o.p. against cheque no.531778 dated 07.09.2005 and cheque no.531777 dated 03.08.2005 @ Rs.32,500/- against the two cheques. The rest of the consideration was scheduled to be paid by the complainant in 48 installments @ Rs.5,417/-only in each and the complainant completed those payments in 2009. In the agreement it was assured that the o.p. would hand over the plot of land after its development for the purpose of its use if the consideration money had been paid in full. Though o.p. had accepted all the installments in respect of the purchase price of the land but did not handed over the possession of the land in the name of the complainant. Numerous personal approach at the office of the o.p. had been made by the complainant but the o.p. remained nonresponsive in this respect till 06.11.2012. In such circumstances complainant wanted to have the opportunity of 25% appreciation of the plot of land by claiming the appreciated value of Rs4,06,250/- from the op. But such opportunity had not been provided by the op. At last, complainant asked the o.p. to comply the agreement otherwise an appropriate action would be taken by the complainant. On 04.12.2012 complainant asked the o.p. by issuing legal notice through his advocate. Finding no other alternative complainant lodged this complaint seeking relief by praying refund of Rs4,06,250/- with interest of @18% per annum and compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- for harassment & mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.
O.p. contested this case by submitting w/v. Ld. Lawyer of the o.p. has argued that the complaint is frivolous, speculative and as such the complaint is liable to be rejected in limini. Ld lawyer of the op argued that complainant did not pay the registration charges in time as a result the plot in question was not registered in the name of the complainant by which the o.p. is no way liable. Complainant is solely liable and responsible for not getting registered the plot of land. Again, the dispute regarding plot of land cannot be a matter of disputes under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and it is a purely a civil disputes. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties as alleged by the complainant and not liable to pay any compensation, cost etc. to the complainant and as such the prayer for compensation is liable to be rejected with exemplary cost.
On the basis of the pleading of the parties the following points are to be decided.
- Whether there was any deficiency in service/UTP on the part of the o.p?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
Decision with reason
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld lawyer of the complainant argued that the complainant paid the amount as per the agreement between the parties for purchasing the plot with its development. On failure of handing over of developed land as per agreement op was liable to refund the money. O.ps failed and neglected to refund the money to the complainant for which the complainant again knocked the op by letter dated 04.12.2012. O.p. failed to provide the land as terms and condition of the agreement. Therefore there is a deficiency in service on the part of the o.p. otherwise it would be termed as UTP for which o.p. is liable to pay compensation and cost.
Considering the submission of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that complainant entered into an agreement with o.p. for purchasing a plot with its development and the complainant paid Rs.3,25,000/-. Since the o.p. failed to provide the developed land it is therefore, considered that there was deficiency in service / utp on the part of the ops. And the complainant will be entitled to get relief. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered.
That the case no.569/2014 is allowed on contest with cost against the o.p. O.p. is directed to pay Rs.3,25,000/- (Rupees three lakh twenty-five thousand) only to the complainant with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh) only and litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand) only. O.p.is also directed to pay the aforesaid amount within 30 days from the date of this order i.d., an interest @ 10% p.a. 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.
