DIST. CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESAL  COMMISSION

NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.

C. C.  No. 54/2019                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

           Date of Filing:                         Date of Admission:                               Date of Disposal:                

          14.02.2019                                   20.02.2019                                        16.01.2023

P R E S E N T                            :-       Smt. Monisha Shaw …………………. Member.

                                       :-        Sri Abhijit Basu……………………….Member

JUDGMENT / FINAL ORDER

            This is a complaint U/S. 12 of C.P. Act 1986 read with Section 13 of C.P.Act, 1986.           

            The brief facts of the case is as under-

Contd/-2

C. C.  No. 54/2019

:: 2 ::

            The complainant entered into a sale agreement on 29^th January 2014 with M/s. Hena Construction represented by O.P. Nos. 2 and 3 named Mr. Anup Bhadra and Sambhu Devnath and Smt.Mira Rani Chattopadhyay for purchase a flat being flat being flat No. at first floor , an area measuring about 600 Sq.ft Super built up area lying on first floor North-Eastern side of the newly constructed building known as ‘Maa Tara Apartment’ along with other amenities and all common area and facilities of the building with all fixtures and fittings both sanitary and building with all common area with a consideration of Rs. 12,50,000/-. The entire property described in schedule ‘A’ of sale agreement and the agreement for sale property mentioned in schedule ‘B’in the deed of agreement of sale. The complainant paid full consideration money and the O.Ps were handed over the physical possession to the complainant. The O.P handed over the possession of unfinished inner civil construction. At the time of delivery possession on 12.04.2015 the complainant endorsed on the possession letter that ‘Received with objection under dissatisfaction’. Thereafter the complainant completed the unfinished civil construction at her own cost from her pocket. One development agreement made between the developer and land lady which was registered at A.D.S.R office Naihati being Deed No.01638 of 2014 and made a power of attorney by landlady being Deed No.01638 of 2014 at A.D.S.R Naihati office. The complainant requested the landlady and developer on several time for register the conveyance but in vain. The landlady Smt.Mira Rani Chattopadhyay @ Mira Chatterjee died intested on 24.01.2017 leaving behind the O.P.Nos.4 to 7. It is mentioned that prior development agreement and agreement for sale the O.P. No.4 to 7 assured and made a written declaration to the developer that they would register the documents as and when necessary on behalf of the said landlady as her legal heir and representatives after her demise. But they i.e. O.P. Nos 4 to 7 refused to register the conveyance in favour of the complainant even after request of developer. Hence the complainant filed this case before this commission.

            Complainant sent notices upon all O.Ps only O.P. Nos. 1 to 3 appeared and filed written version but O.P. Nos. 4 to 7 did not appear before this commission even after receive the notice.

                                Issues were framed for the purpose of judgment

1. Whether the case is maintainable or not?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief or reliefs in this case or not?

Reason for judgment

            We carefully gone through the petition of complaint, written version and other documents filed by the complainant. Considering all facts and circumstances of the case as well as nature and character of the case all the points are interlinked with each other and all the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of brevity and conveyance.

            In the instant case O.P. Nos. 1 to 3 are partnership firm and developers and O.P.. Nos. 4 to 7 are present land lords and complainant is purchaser of a flat which developed by O.P. Nos. 1 to 3. Hence the complainant is a consumer and all the O.Ps are service provider as per Consumer Protection Act. Complainant paid full consideration money and O.Ps handed over the possession with unfinished inner civil work but the complainant completed the unfinished civil construction at her own cost from her pocket. The land lady named Smt. Mira Rani Chattopadhyay @ Mira Chatterjee died intested on 24.01.2017 leaving behind the O.P. Nos. 4 to 7. One sale deed of agreement was made in between O.P. Nos. 1 to 3 and Smt. Mira Rani Chottopadhyay for sale the schedule ‘B’ property. The complainant paid full consideration money. But unfortunately said Smt. Mira Rani Chattopadhyay expired on 24.01.2017 leaving her legal heir as O.P. Nos. 4 to 7. It is mentioned that we find at the agreement of sale deed it is mentioned that the legal heir and successor of said Mira Rani Chattopadhyay would bound to obey the conditions of agreement. It is also mentioned that as the documents annexed with complaint it is found that on 13.09.2013 O.P.Nos. 4 to 7 made a declaration jointly by a written undertaking (prior to enter development agreement by developer and landlady) that if mother of O.P.Nos. 4 to 7 died before completion of project / development work over described ‘A’- Schedule property (i.e.entire property), in that case after demise their mother named Mira Rani Chattopadhyay @ Chatterjee, they ( i.e. O.P. Nos. 4 to 7), shall be legally bound and liable to sign and execute all necessary papers and documents, deed and their according to

Contd/-3

C. C.  No. 54/2019

:: 3 ::

requirements of the developers as legal heir and successor of their mother-Mira Rani Chattopadhyay @ Mira Chatterjee. But in spite of written request of the developer for register the sale deed of conveyance the complainant but they refused the same. Here all the O.Ps are the service provider but they did not provide the service to the complainant hence here is deficiency of service on the part of O.Ps. In view of the above discussion, the prayer of consumer complaint is allowed party as she proves her case which mentioned below:-

Hence,

                  it is ordered

that the case being No. 54 of 2019 is allowed on exparte against opposite parties as they were not present at the time of argument and since long none taken any steps.

Opposite parties are directed to execute and registered the sale deed in favour of the complainant and hand over the completion certificate of the complainant within two months  from the date of judgment and with Rs. 20,000/- for litigation cost and mental agony . The O.P. Nos. 4 to 7 shall pay the amount within two months from the date of judgment. Failing which the complainant has liberty to file execution case as per law.

Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.  

Dictated & Corrected by

           Member

           Member                                                   Member