1) Samar Kumar Chatterjee
Deeshari Confort, 2nd FR-FL-10-2E, 732,
Sree Nagar West, New Garia, Co-Op,
HSG Soc, Kolkata-700094. ….….….….….. Complainant
..VS...
1) M/s. Desire Agro Resorts Development Pvt. Ltd.
Now at P-525, Raja Basanta Roy Road,
Kolkata-700029.
2) The Chief Executive Officer,
M/s. Desire Agro Resorts Development Pvt. Ltd.
Now at P-525, Raja Basanta Roy Road,
Kolkata-700029.
3) The Managing Director,
M/s. Desire Agro Resorts Development Pvt. Ltd.
Now at P-525, Raja Basanta Roy Road,
Kolkata-700029.
4) The Accountant,
M/s. Desire Agro Resorts Development Pvt. Ltd.
Now at P-525, Raja Basanta Roy Road,
Kolkata-700029. ….….….….….….….…..Opposite Parties
Order No. 23 Dated 07/09/2016
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant entered into an agreement for purchasing a plot of land from o.ps. and the total consideration value of the said plot of land was Rs.5,25,000/-. The complainant paid the entire amount in three installments. After receiving he said amount o.ps. started to neglect the complainant though the complainant made several requests to complete the said registration but o.ps. did not pay any heed. Being baffled to have the execution of sale deed in favour of the complainant, the complainant had to write a letter to o.p. no.4 demanding the amount paid by him but it is curious enough that no action was taken on behalf of o.ps.
The complainant ultimately made an application to C.A. Deptt. and a meeting was held and requested the o.p. nos.1 to 4 to refund the money but o.ps. did not abide by the said direction. Having no other alternative the complainant being an aged person of 67 years old had to file this case praying for deficiency in service and also prayed for compensation of Rs.1 lakh and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.
The o.ps. contested the case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It is the specific defence of the o.ps. that the complainant entered into an agreement with o.p. after going through the terms and conditions of the said agreement and the said agreement was signed by and between the parties on 19.8.09 and the complainant failed to perform the terms and conditions of the said agreement. Therefore the complainant cannot take benefit of the fault committed by him. The o.ps. further stated that as per paragraph 12 of the said agreement it was specifically stated that in the event of any change in law or in the event of imposition of any restriction by the appropriate authority or in the event of any order of injunction passed by any court of law the o.ps. shall not be responsible for the same and delay of completion and/or failure to complete the work shall not be deemed as an offence of DARD. The project Ashatirtha was abandoned due to the imposition of restriction stipulated by the govt. as such, for non performance of the terms and conditions of the said agreement for sale cannot be held responsible to o.ps. The demand of money as prayed by the complainant can only be available by the complainant if the complainant file a suit in a Civil Court and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the prayer made by the complainant and accordingly, o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether there was any agreement for sale between the parties for purchasing a plot of land by the complainant.
- Whether the complainant demanded the money from the o.ps.
- Is the complainant entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. lawyer for the complainant emphatically argued that in order to purchase of a plot of land measuring about 2160 sq.ft and the price of the said land was Rs.5,25,000/-. The complainant paid the amount in three installments and the cheques were encashed by the o.ps. In spite of receiving the amount o.ps. did not provide the land to the complainant. The complainant ultimately demanded the money paid by him which was also not provided by o.ps Thereafter complainant had to send complaint to C.A. Deptt. and a meeting was held and a direction was given to the o.ps. to pay the entire amount but the said amount was not paid by o.ps. for which complainant had to file this case.
Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that since their project could not be completed due to intervention of the Govt. of West Bengal, therefore as per the terms of the agreement the o.ps. cannot be held responsible in not returning of the said amount.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is admitted fact that the o.ps. admitted that there was an agreement for sale in respect of the plot of land in favour of the complainant and the o.ps. also admitted that they received the amount of Rs.5,25,000/- and since the agreement for sale did not materialize resulting in execution of deed of sale in favour of the complainant, the complainant will be entitled to get the amount paid by him to o.ps. Accordingly, we hold that the stipulation in the agreement that for interference of the govt. in the said transaction cannot be the ground for refusal of the money to the complainant. Accordingly, we hold that the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.580/2013 is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. The o.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to refund the complainant a sum of Rs.5,25,000/- (Rupees five lakhs twenty five thousand) only along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
