Judgment : Dt.17.5.2017
Mrs. Balaka Chatterjee, Member
This petition of complaint is filed under section 12 of C.P.Act by Sri Janajit Patra and Smt. Tapati Patra alleging deficiency in providing service against (1) M/s Joint Enterprise, (2) Sri Koushik Sengupta, (3) Smt. Subrata Samaddar, (4) Smt. Sandhya Ganguly and (5) Smt. Ruma Mukherjee.
Case of the Complainant in brief is that being in need of a residential flat the Complainants entered into an agreement for sale dt.4.6.2004 with the OP Nos.1 to 4 who are by virtue of a development agreement dt.6.3.2003 executed by and between them and the OP No.5 land-owner in respect of development of a piece of land by constructing a three storied building in the said piece of land at Mouza- Roypur, J.L.No.33 in E.P.99 in C.S.Plot No.235(P), 239(P), P.S.-Netaji Nagar (Previously Jadavpur thereafter Patuli), Dist.- South 24 Parganas. The Complainants have stated that as per terms of the agreement dt.4.6.2004, the consideration amount of the flat which was allotted to them on 2nd floor eastern side of the said building was fixed as Rs.3,60,000/-. The Complainants have further stated that they had paid the entire amount of consideration to the OP No.1 to 4 and receiving the same the OP Nos.1 to 4 delivered possession of the said flat to the Complainants and since then the Complainants have been enjoying the possession of the said flat and accordingly, they have been paying electric charge through the separate electric meter allotted in favour of them. It is the specific allegation of the Complainants that on several occasions they asked the OP Nos.1 to 5 to get the deed of conveyance registered in favour of them but the OPs have been avoiding to translate into reality the registration of deed of conveyance. The Complainants have further stated that they sent a notice dt.25.10.2016 through their Advocate by registered post asking the OPs to take necessary steps to execute deed of conveyance in respect of the flat in question in favour of the Complainants but no fruitful result has been yielded. Accordingly, the Complainants have prayed for direction upon the OPs to cause execution and registration of proper deed of conveyance thereby transferring the property in question in favour of the Complainants to pay a sum of Rs.3,50,000/-, for harassment, mental agony and inconvenience caused to the Complainants and also to pay Rs.10,000/- only as litigation cost.
The OP Nos.1 to 4 contested the case stating inter alia, that since receiving possession of the flat in question the Complainants never took any step for handing over draft deed of conveyance to the OPs. The OP Nos. 1 to 4 further stated that the Complainants never approached the OPs for execution and registration of deed of conveyance rather the Complainants took time for registration of deed in respect of the flat in question on various flimsy pre-text saying this or that in spite of repeated request from the side of OP Nos. 1 to 4.
The OP No.5 did not turn up to contest the case.
Points for determination
- Are the Complainants consumers?
- Is there any deficiency in service?
- Are Complainants entitled to the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons
Point No.1 – The Complainants availed housing construction service rendered by the OPs against receiving consideration and thus has become consumer under the OPs.
Point No.1 is decided accordingly.
Point Nos.2 & 3 – Both points are taken up together for comprehensive discussion and decision.
Admittedly, the Complainants entered into an agreement for sale with the OP developers in respect of the flat as described under schedule in petition of complaint at an agreed amount of consideration. It is also admitted that the Complainants paid entire amount of consideration and the developers delivered possession of the flat. There is no allegation regarding non-delivery/delayed delivery of the possession of flat. Complainants alleged that the developers did not take any step towards registration of deed of conveyance although they requested them to do so on several occasions. The Complainants, however, have alleged that no step was taken by the developers for registration of the Deed of Conveyance but n document except an Advocate’s letter dt.25.10.2016 has been filed before us wherefrom it would have been evident that the Complainants ever asked the OPs for execution and registration of Deed of Conveyance. The Complainants have stated that agreement for sale was executed on 4.6.2004 but they did not state that when the possession of flat was delivered. The Complainants sent Advocate’s letter on 25.10.2016 and filed the instant case on 22.11.2016. This state of affairs left wide space for doubt that whether the Complainants only to claim that they have knocked the developers for registration of Deed of Conveyance. However, it was admitted that the Complainants paid entire amount of consideration to the developers. Therefore, the Complainants are entitled to get the flat in question register in favour of them. Therefore, the prayer for registration is allowed.
Further, the Complainants prayed for direction upon OPs to pay Rs.3,50,000/- as compensation. In our view compensation would be decided on the basis of quantum of monetary loss and the Complainants failed to substantiate that he had suffered such quantum of loss so that an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- to be awarded to compensate the loss.
Under such state of affairs and specially keeping in mind that there is no allegation of delayed delivery of possession, we are inclined not to pass any order as to compensation or costs.
Point Nos.2 & 3 are answered accordingly.
In the result, the complaint succeeds.
Hence,
ordered
That CC/540/2016 is allowed in part on contest against the OPs without any order as to cost and compensation.
The OPs are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance within one month from the date of this order, alternatively, the Complainants are at liberty to cause registration of the Deed of Conveyance through machinery of this Forum.
We pass no order as to costs and compensation.
