West Bengal

North 24 Parganas

CC/429/2018

Sm Lakshmi Hazra W/o Sri Sukdeb Hazra - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S M.R. Construction - Opp.Party(s)

Surata Deb

05 Dec 2022

ORDER

DCDRF North 24 Paraganas Barasat
Kolkata-700126.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/429/2018
( Date of Filing : 26 Oct 2018 )
 
1. Sm Lakshmi Hazra W/o Sri Sukdeb Hazra
27 Raj Kr Mukherjee Rd. Kol-35 PS Baranagar
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/S M.R. Construction
12/13, Bihari Lal Paul Street, Kol-36 PS Baranagar.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Sri Abhijit Basu PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MS. Ms. Monisha Shaw MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 05 Dec 2022
Final Order / Judgement

 

 

 

 

DIST. CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESAL  COMMISSION

NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.

C. C.  CASE  NO. 429/2018

 

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

          26.10.2018                                   26.10.2018                                        05.12.2022

Complainant/s:-

 Sm. Lakshmi Hazra, W/o. Sri Sukdeb Hazra,

27, Raj Kumar Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700035,

P.S. Baranagore, Dist-24 Parganas(North).

 

= Vs.=

1.M/s. M.R. Construction, 12/13, Bihari Lal Paul Street, Kol-36,

P.S. Baranagar, Dist- 24 Parganas(North).

2. Sri Manash Das, S/o. Late Naba Kumar Das,

Opposite Party/s:-

12/13, Bihari Lal Paul Street, Kol-36,

P.S. Baranagar, Dist- 24 Parganas(North).

3. Sri Krisnandu Goswami, 4/1B, Kashiswar Chatterjee Lane,

Kolkata-700036, P.S. Cossipore.

4. Sri Somnath Roy, S/o. Late Kartick Roy,

35, Roy Jatindra Nath Chowdhury Lane, P.S. Baranagar,

Dist- 24 Parganas(N).

5. Sri Balaram Bairagi, S/o. Late Bairagi,

 42, Roy Jatindra Nath Chowdhury Lane, P.s. Baranagar,

Dist-24 Parganas(N) (Developer).

6. Sri Sakher Patra, S/o. Late Bhairav Chandra Patra,

21/2, Baristar P. Mitra Road, Kolkata-03, P.S. Baranagar,

Dist- 24 Pgs(N).

7. Sri Biswanath Patra, S/o. Late Bhairav Chandra Patra,

 

21/2, Baristar P. Mitra Road, Kolkata-03, P.S. Baranagar,

Dist- 24 Pgs(N).

8. Sri Tagorial Patra, S/o. Late Bhairav Chandra Patra,

21/2, Baristar P. Mitra Road, Kolkata-03, P.S. Baranagar,

Dist- 24 Pgs(N).

9. Kumari Manorama Patra, D/o. S/o. Late Bhairav Chandra Patra, 21/2, Baristar P. Mitra Road, Kolkata-03, P.S. Baranagar,

Dist- 24 Pgs(N).

10. Smt. Baby Das, D/o. S/o. Late Bhairav Chandra Patra, 21/2, Baristar P. Mitra Road, Kolkata-03, P.S. Baranagar,

Dist- 24 Pgs(N).

 

 

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

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

 

JUDGMENT / FINAL ORDER

 

 

The complainant filed a case under Section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 as amended in brief the facts of the case is as under.

 

The complainant booked a flat and paid as earnest money of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the developers. Here opposite party Nos. 2 to 5 are developers and O.P. Nos. 6 to 10 are the land owners of the premises No. 21/2, Baristar P. Mitra Road, Kolkata-35, P.s. Baranagar, Dist-North 24 Pgs who were submitted as the legal heirs of AngurBala Patra. O.P. Nos. 1 to 5 acted and represented as a developer and promoter. O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 all are partners of M/s. M.R. Construction. The complainant entered into an agreement on 22.12.2015 with O.P. Nos. 1 to 5 to purchase a complete flat measuring about 350 Sq.ft Super built up area in the eastern side of the 3rd floorat the said premises number in the building with proportionate land and common facilities and amenities from the developer’s allocation. The complainant paid a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as advance out of total consideration money of Rs. 6,50,000/-.  The complainant sent a legal notice through Advocate for register the deed of conveyance towards complainant but O.Ps denied to register the deed of conveyance.

 

 

Contd/-2

 

 

 

 

 

C. C.  CASE  NO. 429/2018

 

:: 2 ::

 

Hence, the complainant filed this case. The complainant served notices upon the opposite parties through speed post and track report were submitted.

 

The O.P. Nos. 2,6,7,8,9 and 10 was not appeared after receiving the notice from this commission the O.P. Nos. 3 to 5 filed written version stating that they never entered into an agreement with the complainant but they admitted that O.P. No.1 M/s. M.R. Construction received a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the complainant but expressed inability to execute registered deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant since they have retired from their business.

Following issues were framed for the purpose of decision

  1. Whether the complaint 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 to each other and as such all the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of brevity and conveniences.

 

            On perusal of the materials record which is submitted and also complaint shared by affidavit and all other documents and objection available in the case record and the argument of the Advocate of complainant it is revealed that the complainant paid Rs. 5,00,000/- as advanced money out of Rs. 6,50,000/-. At the time of execution of sale agreement as O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 executed as partners of M/s. M.R. Construction, therefore the O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 cannot denies their responsibility by retiring from business. Before and at the time of retirement all the partners are liable for all liabilities exist. Hence O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 are liable for the liability of O.P. No.1. They cannot deny the liability of partnership firm. Some persons made a partnership farm. Hence retired and existing partners all are liable for previous liabilities  as they were partners at the time of execution of agreement for sale deed. Hence O.Ps are jointly and severally liable to register the flat by receiving the dues amount alternatively the O.Ps shall return the advance receiving money of Rs. 5,00,000/- with 6% interest from the date of receiving till recovery.

 

            Hence the complainant is a consumer and O.Ps are service provider. O.Ps are  not provide their service and O.Ps made unfair trade practice hence this matter shall try this commission. The case is under the jurisdiction of this commission area.

 

            Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.

 

Hence,

             It is Ordered

that the case being C.C. No. 429/2018 be and the case is allowed as exparte as O.Ps were not present at the time of argument on the date fixed.  

 

The complainant (Smt. Lakshmi Hazra) do get a decree in the instant case, therefore O.Ps are directed to register the deed of conveyance as agreement made on 22.12.2015 and give possession to the complainant after receiving balance consideration money alternatively the O.Ps are directed to return the advanced receiving money of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the complainant with an interest of 6% from 22.12.2015 till recovery within two months. 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.

Dictated & Corrected by me                      

 

Member                                                                                                         Member

 

Member

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri Abhijit Basu]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MS. Ms. Monisha Shaw]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.