DATE OF FILING : 21-03-2014.
DATE OF S/R : 24-07-2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 14-10-2014.
Sri Mahendra Bafna,
son of late Madnesh Bafna,
residing at 5/1, Mullick Street, 3rd floor,
P.O. & P.S. Burrabazar,
Kolkata.--------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
1. M/S. Tapan Building Construction,
represented by its proprietor Tapan Kumar Roy,
son of late Aswini Kumar Roy,
22/4, Raj Krishna Kumar Street, Belur, P.S. Bally,
District – Howrah.
2. Smt. Renuka Bala Bhattacharya,
@ Gitamoyee Debi, wife of late Ramkrishna Bhattacharya.
3. Sri Shyamal Krishna Bhattacharya,
4. Kumari Hironmoyee Bhattacharya,
5. Kumari Karunamoyee Bhattacharya,
6. – 711101.-------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for direction upon the o.ps. to deliver peaceful possession of the flat as mentioned in the ‘B’ schedule and to pay compensation together with litigation costs as the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 in spite of execution of proper deed of conveyance did not deliver peaceful possession of the same wherein o.p. no. 3 has been in wrongful occupation of the same in collusion with o.p. nos. 1 & 2.
2. In spite of proper service of notice the o.ps. did not file written version. So the case was heard ex parte.
3. Upon pleadings of the complainant two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. ?
ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
4. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Admittedly the sale deed was executed and registered after receiving the full consideration money with respect to the ‘B’ schedule property on 28-12-2006. But the possession of the same has not been delivered by the o.p. no. 1. The o.p. no. 3 is in unauthorized occupation of the same. M.P. Case was also filed. We are of the view that gross deficiency in service was committed by the o.p. no. 1 in not delivering the possession. Both the points are accordingly disposed of .
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 155 of 2014 ( HDF 155 of 2014 ) be and the same is allowed ex parte as against the o.p. nos. 1, 2 & 3 with costs and dismissed against the o.p. nos. 4 and 5 and 7 without costs.
The O.P. nos. 1, 2 & 3 be directed to deliver possession of the ‘B’ schedule flat to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.
The o.p. nos.1, 2 & 3 be jointly or severally directed to pay Rs. 2 lakhs to the complainant as compensation for causing mental pain and prolonged harassment together with Rs. 5,000/- as litigation cost.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( T.K. Bhattacharya )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
