HON’BLE JUSTICE ISHAN CHANDRA DAS, PRESIDENT

            This Appeal U/s 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been directed against the Judgement and Order dated 10.7.2017 passed by the ld. D.C.D.R.F., North 24 Parganas, at Barasat in C.C. 386 of 2016. In the judgement impugned ld. Trial Forum while disposing of the Complaint Case (being CC 386 of 2016) dismissed the same exparte against the Opposite parties and being aggrieved by such order of dismissal, the present Appeal has been preferred by the Complainant of the instant Complaint Case.

          Briefly stated, the case of the Complainant/Appellant and (hereinafter referred to as the Complainant) was that in response to an advertisement through the brochure relating to “Rajarhat Green Field”, the Opposite parties promised to provide plots of land with complete facilities of metal road, electric supply, water supply , sewerage and plantation of lush and landscape greenery. The complainant decided to purchase plot No. A6 (Block A) and entered into an agreement for sale on 9.7.2012 measuring an area of a little more or less 1800 Sq.ft., equivalent to 2.5 Cottahs, in the plot described in paragraph 3 of the Petition of Complaint. The Opposite parties promised that the entire project would be completed by December, 2013 and as such the Complainant paid entire agreed amount on 10.1.2013 and got a Deed of Conveyance in his favour for plot no. A6. The Opposite party No.2 being the constituted attorney of the Vendor executed the Deed of conveyance but inspite of payment of the entire consideration as per the agreement, neither the plot, registered in favour of the complainant,  was demarcated nor any infrastructural development took place as promised , particularly, those referred in schedule C of the registered deed, to enable the complainant to hold and enjoy the property, duly conveyed by the opposite parties. As per agreement for sale, the development, allotment and possession of the said plot was scheduled to be completed in all respects by 30.12.2013. The Opposite party alleged to sell the said plot with promise to provide modern luxurious amenities and comforts within the township, as mentioned and had received consideration from the complainant a sum of Rs. 11,19,750/- (Rupees eleven lakh nineteen thousand seven hundred fifty) . The Opposite parties allured the complainant to invest in their project with a promise of very high appreciation of their project-value but ultimately failed to demarcate the plots, as per agreement for sale. The Opposite parties had been making false excuse and showed frivolous reasons to the petitioners since January 2014 for not demarcating the plots and erecting facilities of the township within the time mentioned which caused deprivation of owning the  property. The Opposite parties admitted their lapses and promised to refund the entire consideration paid a sum of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees eight lakh fifty thousand) to the complainant upto August 2015 and  in August 2015 when the complainant asked for balance consideration to the tune of Rs.2,69,750/- and further asked for execution of the deed of cancellation   the complainant was put  in trouble for which the complainant had to take recourse of the D.C.D.R.F. claiming reliefs in terms of the Petition of complaint.

          The respondents being the Opposite parties did not appear to contest the Complaint Case, left the matter to be heard exparte against them and ld. D.C.D.R.F., upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the materials on record, dismissed the Complaint Case exparte. The Respondents/Opposite parties also did not appear  before the State Commission and the Appeal was heard exparte against them.

          Fact remains, the complainant purchased a plot of land as referred to in the schedule of the Petition of Complaint upon assurance that the Opposite parties would provide modern luxurious amenities and comfort like metal road, electric supply, water supply, sewerage  and plenty of lush and landscape with greenery by the Opposite party in its project ‘Rajarhat  Green field’. It is the allegation of the complainant that the Opposite parties could not/did not provide such amenities to the Complainant rather they refunded the major part of the consideration of a sum of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees eight lakh fifty thousand) till August 2015 and the balance amount of Rs.2,69,750/- (Rupees two lakh sixty nine thousand seven hundred fifty) is due which is to be realized from the OP/respondent. It is submitted that,   the complainant intended to purchase a plot of land but the condition of the amenities, to be supplied by the Opposite parties were the services, hired by the complainant and failure on their part to provide those amenities can be equated with deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice where the Consumer court has power to intervene. It is evident that a sum of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees eight lakh fifty thousand) was refunded to the Complainant till August 2015 and a consideration of Rs.2,69,750/- are due, out of total consideration of Rs.11,19,750/- (Rupees eleven lakh nineteen thousand seven hundred fifty) . The complainant is claiming the balance of the consideration, paid to the Opposite parties to the tune of Rs.2,69,750/- (Rupees two lakh sixty nine thousand seven hundred fifty) as proper service was not provided to him and in our considered opinion such a claim cannot be denied on the ground that the transfer is a ‘sale-simplicitor’.

          Hence, we set aside the judgement impugned and resulting that the Complaint Case is allowed exparte. The Opposite parties are directed to refund the balance consideration of a sum of Rs.2,69,750/- (Rupees two lakh sixty nine thousand seven hundred fifty) to the complainant upon getting the deed executed in favour of the complainant as ‘cancelled’. The cost of the Deed of cancellation shall be borne by the Opposite parties. However, the complainant shall be entitled to compensation of a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) to be recovered from the Opposite parties, who would pay the same to the complainant within sixty days from the date of the order and the entire process of recovery  of balance consideration and execution of the deed of cancellation etc. shall be completed within the period of sixty days.

          With the above observations and directions this Appeal stands disposed of.