DIST. CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESAL  COMMISSION

NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.

C.C. No.74/2017

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

                        29.08.2019                              09.09.2019                              27.03.2023

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

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

            JUDGMENT/FINAL ORDER

            The case filed by the complainant U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

            The brief facts of the case is as follows:-

            One agreement for sale was made between the complainant and opposite paty on 03.12.2014 for sale flat being flat No. 1A on the first floor measuring about 500 Sq.ft more or less super built up area at premises No. 80, Lalgarh Colony, Holding No. 92 (Old), 105(New), with the limits of South Dum Dum Municipality, P.S. Dum Dum, Kolkata-700030, Dist- North 24 Parganas for a consideration money of Rs. 12,50,000/-. The complainant paid total Rs. 9,50,000/- to the Opposite parties and also paid Rs. 30,000/- for installation of electric meter. Complainant was ready to pay the balance consideration amount. Opposite parties suddenly sold the said flat to third party beyond the knowledge of the complainant. After knowing the facts of sale the flat the complainant demanded for refund the paid earnest money and cost of electric meter charges total Rs. (9,50,000/-+30,000/-)= Rs. 9,80,000/-. The opposite parties harassed the complainant and did not refund the money and lastly refuse to refund the money. Hence the complainant filed this case for get reliefs as prayed.

            In spite of serving the notice upon opposite parties they did not feel any urge to appear before this commission after submitting W/V by the O.P stating that the case is time barred, alleged that the complainant is not paid the balance amount and also did not paid interest etc.

            Issues were framed for the purpose of decision

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

Decision with Reasons

            Considering the facts and circumstances as well as nature and character of the case all the points are interlinked with each other as such all the points are taken up together for consideration for sake of brevity and convenience. The case is within territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction of this commission. Hence this commission has ample power to try this case.

            On perusal of the complaint supporting affidavit along with related documents and other documents found in the case record and the argument of the complainant, it is revealed that as per agreement for sale dated 03.12.2014 both the parties made an agreement for sale a flat measure about 500 Sq.ft super build up area which mentioned in the ‘B’ Schedule of agreement for sale deed with a consideration of money Rs. 12,50,000/-. The complainant paid Rs. 9,50,000/- for part of consideration mney and also paid Rs. 30,000/- towards installation of electric meter. But the opposite parties sold the said flat to third party without consent and knowledge of the complainant. Here, complainant is a consumer of the opposite parties and

Contd/-2

: : 2 : :

C.C. No.74/2017

opposite parties are the service provider according to Consumer Protection Act. As per Consumer Protection Act the complainant is a consumer and O.Ps are service provider but O.P did not provide their service accordingly. There is no clause that the amount would be forfeited by the O.Ps due to delay of balance consideration amount. Before selling the flat to the third party O.Ps ought to intimate the complainant. O.P members could not sell the suit flat to third party in such a way. However, presently O.Ps could not able to return the flat to the complainant therefore O.Ps required to refuse the money of Rs. 9,50,000/- with 6% interest from the date of receipt till recovery. Complainant did his part but opposite parties failed provide service to the complainant as such opposite parties liable to refund the receiving  amount to the complainant with 6% interest from the date of received till recovery.  The Complainant prays for refund of Rs. 9,50,000/- from the Opposite Parties and other reliefs.

            Complainant proves his case as such she is entitled to get reliefs.

            Hence,

                              it is ordered

            that the case being No. 74/2017 is allowed ex-parte against the opposite parties.

            It is directed the opposite parties to refund the Rs. 9,50,000/- which they received from the complainant with 6% interest from the date of receipts till recovery alongwith compensation and litigation cost of Rs. 30,000/- within two months from the date of this judgment. Failing which complainant has liberty to put this decree into execution according to law.

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

 Dictated & Corrected by me  

Member                                                                                                                     

Member                                                                                              Member