Order No.10
dt.29-2-2016
Record is put up today for order.
In brief the facts stated in the complaint are that one Shri Paresh Chandra Sarkar filed this complaint against OP No.1 M/s. RSV Biodome Partnership Firm being represented by its partner Shri Anandarup Chakraborty and others OP No.2 to 7 who are allegedly the owners of the land on which OP No.1 constructed the building.
That OP No.1 and OP No.2 to 7 entered into the agreement for development of land situated under Behala Police Station measuring about 10 cottahs 13 chittaks 16 square feet lying and situated at Mouza Sahapur, J.L.No.8, TouziNo.93/101 under Khatian Nos.945, 938, 218/1 under Dag No.944 at present under Kolkata Municipal Corporation.
As per the said agreement OP No.1 constructed a building in which he has a right to sale some of the flats to the purchasers.
Complainant Shri Paresh Chandra Sarkar entered into an agreement with OP No.1 for purchasing Flat No.F-2 on ground floor, South East West side measuring 800 sq. ft. super built-up area and 120 sq. ft. car parking in a 3 storied building. This agreement was entered into between parties on 15th February, 2012. Thereafter OP No.1 hand over possession of the flat to Shri Paresh Chandra Sarkar who is residing in the said flat having electric connection but the said flat has not been registered in favour of the Complainant for which the present complaint has been filed.
After admitting this complaint notices were issued upon OPs which was served but OPs did not appear and so the case was heard ex-parte.
Decisions with reasons
Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief in order to substantiate the allegation of the complaint and also filed written argument.
On perusal of the affidavit-in-chief it appears that he has in brief stated that he paid Rs.19 lakhs (Nineteen Lakhs) for flat as well as for car parking of about 120 sq. ft. He has further stated that he has filed the document including electricity bill to show that he resides there. Now, it appears that he has prayed for a direction upon the OPs for registration and execution of deed of conveyance and also a direction upon the OP No.1 to deliver possession of the said car parking in default to return Rs.2 Lakhs (Rupees Two Lakhs) which he has paid for car parking.
On perusal of the agreement for sale dated 15-2-2012 it appears that in paragraph 17 it is stated that developer will hand over vacant un-cumbered possession of the said flat or register the final deed of conveyance with the availability of water and electricity.
Possession letter filed before this Forum make it clear that on 4-7-2012 the possession of the flat as well as 120 sq. ft. car parking was handed over. This possession letter has been signed by Shri Paresh Chandra Sarkar.
Electricity Bill filed reveals that Shri Paresh Chandra Sarkar is in possession of the flat.
So far now remains the fact that till now the developer has not registered the flat in favour of the Complainant.
The prayer is in order for directing the OPs to make the deed of conveyance register in the name of petitioner. But agreement for sale deed on 15-2-2012 clearly mentions that it is an agreement between the Complainant and OP No.1 who is developer and so it is the liability of the developer to register the deed of conveyance in favour of the Complainant.
So far as prayer for refund of car parking is concerned, it appears that on 4-7-2012 the car parking on the strength of possession certificate was handed over to the Complainant. So, the question of refund of Rs.2 lakhs (Rupees Two Lakhs) does not arise and this prayer cannot be allowed.
Accordingly, it is true that since the flat has not been registered it is incumbent duty of the OP No.1 to make a deed of conveyance in favour of the Complainant provided Complainant pays requisite stamp duty and other charges as levied by the Government.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
CC/34/2015 and the same is allowed ex-parte in part. Developer OP No.1 is directed to make a deed of conveyance in favour of Complainant of the flat in question i.e. F-2 within 3 months of this order. Prayer for refund of Rs.2 Lakhs (Rupees Two Lakhs) for car parking is considered and rejected as possession letter is clear that car parking has been handed over.
