West Bengal

Hooghly

CC/165/2016

Sri Ashok Kr. Mondal - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Dreamland Corporation & Ors. - Opp.Party(s)

Smt. Sukarna Banerjee

10 Jan 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, HOOGHLY
CC OF 2013
PETITIONER
VERS
OPPO
 
Complaint Case No. CC/165/2016
 
1. Sri Ashok Kr. Mondal
80, K.M. Sha Street, Serampur
Hooghly
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/S. Dreamland Corporation & Ors.
Mahesh, Serampur
Hooghly
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri Biswanath De PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE Smt. Devi Sengupta MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri Samaresh Kr. Mitra MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 10 Jan 2018
Final Order / Judgement

                The case of the complainant in a nutshell is that the complainant entered into an agreement with the op for purchase a flat measuring super built area more or less 678 sq. ft. on the first floor including of 20% super built area together with undivided impatiable proportionate share of land and common area of total consideration of Rs.12,20,400/-only being flat no.1/B at holding no.28, Nabakrishna Guin Lane  P.O. & P.S. Serampur, Hooghly from the op 1 on 23.07.12 and the op 1 issued money receipt in favour of the complainant.

         Op 1 is the Power of Attorney holder and the  other ops are in a joint venture going to construct the multistoried building at 28, Naba Krishna Guin Lane under Serampur Municipality.

         The complainant. states that in the clause 17 of the agreement, the op agreed and under take that the possession of the proposed flat shall be given to the complainant. within 6 months from the date of execution of the agreement for sale. Thereafter, the complainant. on several occasion approached to the op 1 to register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant. the complainant. further states that for about 10 times on various vague plea the op members intentionally refused to register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant.  It is seen by the complainant. that the construction work of the schedule flat is still incomplete. Thereafter , the complainant. on 01.01.16 went to the house of the op 1  to execute the sale deed. But op 1 refused to do the so and used filthy languages and also threatened he complainant. with dire consequences. On 23.2.16 the complainant. sent a complain to the Inspector –in charge , Serampur P.S. on 9.2.16 again the complainant went to op members . But  again the op members threatened the complainant. ith antisocial people and refused to hand over the possession of said flat.

         The complainant. states and contends that the op 1 has failed to give possession of the said flat in favour of the complainant. .There is gross deficiency on the part of the op 1. Therefore, the complainant. prayed a direction before the Ld. Forum to pay the complainant. a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-  by the op 1 as compensation , harassment and Rs. 3,00,000/- for mental agony and Rs. 3,00,000/- towards cost of the proceedings and the complainant. also prays for  a direction to the op 1 to execute the deed of registration in favour of the complainant. in respect of the schedule flat and also give possession of the schedule flat to the complainant.

         In view of the fact it is crystal clear that the op 1 did not provide service to the complainant. and failed and neglected to execute the sale deed in favour of the complainant.

So, it is a fit case to hold that the complainant. has proved the allegation of deficiency of service against the op 1.

             Notice of this case is duly served upon the ops though  op 1 & op 3 file w/v but other ops no. 4 to 17 did not appear .  Op 1 has taken several times for filing E/C. Hence the case was taken up for exparte hearing.

              In this connection to prove this case some documents have been filed by the complainant. Complainant. tendering an affidavit in chief supported by the affidant.

      Documents filed : -   1).  Xerox copy of agreement for sale.

                                        2).  Xerox copy of payment   receipt by Dreamland Corp. 4 – in numbers.

                                      3).  Xerox copies of track report.

 Hence it is ordered

             That the complainant ‘s case be and the same is allowed exparte. The complainant. do get Rs.1,00,000/- for deficiency  of service payable by the op 1 to the complainant. Op 1 is also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- for compensation to the complainant. for the mental agony and harassment and the op 1 is also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant. towards cost of the proceeding .the op 1 is also directed to execute register sale deed in terms of the agreement for sale of the schedule flat in favour of the complainant. within 60 days from the date of this order.The op 1 is directed to comply the above order within 45 days from the dt. Of this order i.d. Rs.100/- per day shall be deposited by the op 1 and that should be deposited in the Legal Aid Fund.

            Let a copy of this order be made over to the parties free of cost.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri Biswanath De]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE Smt. Devi Sengupta]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri Samaresh Kr. Mitra]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.