Date of filing :6.12.2017

Judgment : Dt.20.3.2018

Mrs. Balaka Chatterjee, Member

            This petition of complaint is filed under section 12 of   C.P.Act, 1986 by Fatik Chandra Sit alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties (referred as OPs hereinafter) namely (1) M/s Hanumann Housing and Development (P) Ltd., (2) Karunamoy Sinha, Director of M/s Hahnemann Housing and Development (P) Ltd.

            Case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant came to know through website of OP that the OP Development company was allotting plots of lands lying and situated at Rajbandh Durgapur and contacted the OPs at their registered office as well as branch office to obtain a brochure and being satisfied with the terms of the brochure paid an advance amount of Rs.1,50,000/- by cash for having a plot measuring 3 cottah in scheme (c) against which OP No.1 issued a receipt and booking certificate in respect of a plot of land measuring 3 cottah being No.P-606 at Mouja – Manikara. It is further stated by the Complainant that subsequently he paid some amount by cheque i.e. Rs.33,334/- on 24.12.2012 vide cheque No.000434184, Rs.16,667/- on 29.01.2013 vide cheque No.000434185, Rs.33,334/- on 30.3.2013 vide cheque No.000434186 and Rs.33,334/- on 30.5.2013 vide cheque No.000434187 and, accordingly, an agreement for sale dt.17.6.2013 was executed by and between the Complainant and OP No.1 through OP No.2 in respect of the said plot of land lying and situated at Mouja – Manikara, J.L.No.77, Dag No.525, Khatian No.1252, 1253, 1254, P.S.-Kaksa, Dist.- Burdwan, for a consideration of Rs.7,50,000/- which was to have been completed within three years. The Complainant have further stated that the Complainant had paid entire consideration amount of Rs.7,50,000/- by 21 installments within 30^th October, 2015 and further an excess amount of Rs.16,667/- had been paid by the Complainant but in spite of receiving the same the OP neither delivered the plot nor did execute the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Complainant. Further the Complainant has stated that the OP took no initiative to develop the land including the said plot which was meant for the Complainant and observing such in action on the part of the OPs the Complainant demanded refund of entire amount which he had already paid and accordingly, submitted original Agreement for sale, booking certificate, EMI book, First booking counter part, PAN Card, Voter Card with the OP No.1 but despite of receiving the same the OPs did not refund any amount. The Complainant has further stated that the Complainant booked another plot of land by paying Rs.4,60,000/- on 7.11.2012 being Plot No.232 for measuring an area of 2 cottah at Santiban Poject, Tulip City, Asansol and receiving the same the OP issued a booking certificate and an agreement for sale was executed by and between the Complainant and OP No.1 through OP No.2. But, the OP No.1 failed to allot the plot of land and the Complainant deposited some documents with OP No.1 in assurance to get refund of entire money although, in reality, the said OP did not refund the same.

However, subsequently, the Complainant sent two legal notices on 27.10.2017 and 15.11.2017 to the OPs but that yielded no fruitful result. Accordingly, the complainant by filing the instant Consumer Complaint prayed for direction upon OPs to refund entire principal amount along with interest @ 18% p.a., to pay Rs.10,00,000/- towards mental agony.

            The Complainant adduced affidavit-in-chief. The Complainant annexed brochure of the project receipt dt.3.10.2012, booking certificate dt.3.10.2012 Agreement for sale dt.17.6.2013, payment details document showing that the Complainant deposited some account with OP, Project Brochure of Tulip City, Agreement for sale dt.26.12.2012, Advocate’s letter dt.27.10.2017

            Points for determinations

1. Whether the case is maintainable before this Forum?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons

Point No.1

The Complainant has stated that he booked two plots of land with the OP and paid an amount Rs.12,26,677/- towards consideration.

On perusal of the documents on record it appears that the Complainant has prayed for refund of entire principal amount along with interest which is approximately Rs.19,00,000/- and also prayed for direction upon OPs to pay Rs.10,00,000/- towards damages. On that score, this Forum has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the case since Section 11(1) provides that “the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint where the value of goods or service hired does not exceeds Rs.Twenty lakh”.

Point No.1 decided accordingly.

Point No.2 – Since Point No.1 decided negative, there is no scope for going into the merit of the case.

            In the result, the Consumer Complainant does not succeed.

            Hence,

ordered

            That CC/685/2017 is dismissed being not maintainable.