Date of Filing: 14.01.2019

Date of Judgment:  24.12.2021 

Mrs.  Sashi Kala Basu, Hon’ble  President

This complaint is filed by the complainant, Nilay Sen Gupta, under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 against the Opposite Parties ( referred to as O.Ps hereinafter) namely 1)  M/s Rehabilitation, 2) Amitava Roy Chowdhury, 3) Parimal Paul, being dead his heirs 3(a) Smt. Sutapa Pal and 3(b) Partha Pal,  alleging deficiency in service  and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps.

                The case of the complainant, in short, is that O.P no.2 is the Managing Director of the O.P no.1 company who has been carrying on business of Real Estate and O.P no. 3 is the land owner of the A Schedule property.  O.P no.3 namely Parimal Paul (Since deceased and his legal heirs being substituted) and O.P no.1 entered into a Development Agreement dated 29.7.1999 to construct a 3 storied building. By an Agreement for Sale dated 28.2.2009 complainant agreed to purchase the flat described therein from the developers’ allocation at a consideration of Rs. 5,50,000/- . The complainant has paid full consideration money of Rs. 5,50,000/- to the O.P no.1 being represented by O.P no.2. The possession has already been delivered to the complainant on 16.4.2009. But inspite of repeated requests the deed of sale has not been executed and registered in favour of the complainant. O.Ps avoided to execute and register the deed on the plea that there was embargo of 10 years. So, the present complaint has been filed ,praying for directing the O.Ps to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the subject flat in favour of the complainant, in alternative to register the flat through the machinery of this Commission, to pay compensation of Rs. 2 lac and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.  

                On perusal of the record it appears that inspite of notices being served, the O.Ps did not take any step and thus , the case was directed to be proceeded exparte against them.

                Complainant has filed the Agreement entered into between the parties, money receipts and the notice sent by the complainant to the O.Ps.  

                So, only point requires determination whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for.

DECISION WITH REASONS

                In support of his claim , complainant has filed the affidavit-in-chief and the agreement for sale as well as money receipts. On perusal of the Agreement for Sale filed by the complainant it appears that the O.P no.1 being represented by its Director ,O.P no.2, as developer entered into an agreement with the complainant on 28.2.2009 to sell the flat described in Schedule B of the said Agreement at a total consideration price of Rs.5,50,000/-. Complainant has filed money receipts showing payment of the sum of Rs. 3 Lac and Rs. 2,40,000/- respectively. In the Agreement there is also categorical reflection that complainant had paid a sum of Rs.10,000/-. So, apparently total sum of Rs. 5,50,000/- has been paid by the complainant. It appears from the Agreement filed by the complainant that O.P developer was empowered by the owner to enter into agreement to sell the flat as per his allocation with the intending purchaser.

                If that be so, as no contrary material is forthcoming before this Commission to counter the claim of the complainant, he is entitled to the execution and registration of the deed of conveyance in respect of the said flat as per agreement dated 28.2.2009. It may be mentioned here that apparently Deed of Gift was executed in favour of the original owner namely Parimal Pal on 14.10.1999 by the Government of West Bengal. So, the embargo restraining the transfer for 10 years has already expired. So, complainant is entitled to the execution and registration of the deed. However,   on consideration of the facts and situation of this case, especially the embargo as the complainant himself has agitated in the complaint, we find no justification to pass any order of compensation.

Hence,

                 ORDERED

That CC/19/2019 is allowed exparte against the O.Ps.

The O.Ps are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the flat as per agreement dated 28.2.2009  in favour of the complainant  within 3 months from this date, failing which complainant may take step for registration of the deed through the machinery of this Commission.

O.Ps are also directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant within the aforesaid period of 3 months.