Order No. 22 dt. 04/08/2017
The case of the complainants in brief is that the predecessor in interest of the complainants i.e. Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty entered into an agreement with o.ps. for purchasing a plot of land at a price of Rs.66,000/- and Rs.44,000/- for development cost for the said land. The said agreement was entered into on 20.8.04. The complainant paid the entire consideration money of Rs.1,10,000/-. The o.ps. in spite of receiving the money did not handover the land in question to the complainants. On the basis of the said fact the complainants filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. to handover the land or refund of the amount of Rs.1,10,000/- and compensation of Rs.1 lakh and litigation cost of Rs.50,000/-.
The o.ps. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the agreement was executed in the year 2004, but in the agreement itself in clause 10 it was mentioned that upon completion of the development work within 3-5 years from the date of execution of the agreement the purchaser will be entitled to get the land. It was further alleged that the agreement was made in the year 2004 and the case was filed in the year 2013 i.e. after the lapse of more than 2 years and no petition u/s 24A of the C.P. Act was filed and the complainants will not be entitled to get any relief. The o.ps. further stated that the agreement was entered into between Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty, but here in this case, Smt. Arati Chakraborty and Sri Kunal Chakraborty filed this case. They must prove that they are the legal heirs of original purchaser Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty. On the basis of the said fact o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether the predecessor in interest of the complainants entered into an agreement with o.ps.?
- Whether the amount was paid by said Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty?
- Whether the land was provided to the complainant being the legal heirs of Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
- Whether the complainants will be 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 complainants argued that the predecessor in interest of the complainants i.e. Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty entered into an agreement for purchasing a land which o.ps. agreed to develop and on the basis of the said fact the said original purchaser Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty paid the entire consideration price to o.ps. In spite of the payment of the said amount the land was not provided to the complainant for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. to handover the land or refund of the amount as well as other reliefs.
Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that the agreement was entered into in the year 2004, but the case was filed in the 2013 and in the agreement itself it was mentioned that the land is to be provided within 4-5 years from the date of agreement i.e. the complainant ought to have filed this case within 2 years from the said stipulated year, but the complainant did not file this case within the statutory period of 2 years as per the C.P. Act and accordingly, the case is not maintainable.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it appears that the agreement was entered into between the predecessor in interest of the complainants and o.ps. and it is also an admitted fact that the predecessor of the complainants Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty paid the consideration money. It is undisputed fact that o.ps. assured that after developing the land in question the said land will be delivered. But the land was not developed and the same was not handed over to the original purchaser Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty. Since after the demise of Durgesh Chandra Chakraborty the legal heirs of him being the widow and son filed this case. It is also an admitted fact that the land was not provided as per the agreement entered into between the parties. Since the land was not provided till the date of filing of this case, therefore it will be considered as a continuous cause of action and the legal heirs of the said predecessor have every right to file this case against the o.ps. praying for refund of the money as well as other reliefs. It appears from the record that o.ps. in their w/v stated that they cannot provide the land because of some legal impediment. On the basis of the said fact we hold that the complainants will be entitled to get the refund of the money as well as compensation and litigation cost.
Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.74/2013 is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. The o.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to refund a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- (Rupees one lakh ten thousand) only to the complainants along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten 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.
