West Bengal

Rajarhat

MA/13/2021

Sri Gopal Das Agarwala - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Mandira Construction - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh

20 Apr 2022

ORDER

Additional Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat (New Town )
Kreta Suraksha Bhavan,Rajarhat(New Town),2nd Floor
Premises No. 38-0775, Plot No. AA-IID-31-3, New Town,P.S.-Eco Park,Kolkata - 700161
 
Miscellaneous Application No. MA/13/2021
( Date of Filing : 28 Jan 2021 )
In
Complaint Case No. CC/39/2021
 
1. Sri Gopal Das Agarwala
Residing at Shantiban Housing Complex, 7 Uma Kanta Sen Lane, Block- SEJUTI, Flat No. B 302, Kolkata-700030, P.S- Chitpore,
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. M/s. Mandira Construction
4/14, Rath Tala , P.S- Belghoria, Kolkata-700056.
2. Mr. Ram Prasad Bhadra, Managing Director.
M/s. Mandira Construction Co. Pvt Ltd. 4/14, Rath Tala, P.S- Belghoria, Kolkata-700056.
3. Rini Bhadra, Managing Director
M/s. Mandira Construction Co. Pvt Ltd. 4/14, Rath Tala, P.S- Belghoria, Kolkata-700056.
4. Mr. Abhishek Bhadra, Director
M/s. Mandira Construction Co. Pvt Ltd. 4/14, Rath Tala, P.S- Belghoria, Kolkata-700056.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Silpi Majumder MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Partha Kumar Basu MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate for the Appellant 1
 
Dated : 20 Apr 2022
Final Order / Judgement

Order No. 07

Today is fixed for hearing of the Miscellaneous Application being no. MA/13/2021.

The Ld. Advocate of both sides are present. The application being no. 13/2021 is for condonation of delay of nearly a month in filing the complaint case. The move of the complainant is vehemently opposed by the Ld. Advocate appearing for the OPs.

The agreement for sale of a flat priced at Rs. 2,57,325/- was made in between the parties on 09.10.1991. and substantial part of the consideration money has been paid by the purchaser to the developer on the specified date. But admittedly neither the balance of the consideration money did not paid by the complainant nor the developer has handed over the said flat in favour of the complainant. It is the contention of the Ld. Advocate appearing for the OPs that the complainant was asked in 2016 for making payment of the balance amount by making paper publication. It is the contention of the Ld. Advocate of the complainant that the OPs sold the said flat to a third party by executing a sale deed on 04.11.2016.

The view expressed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in (2000)-1 Supreme Court cases 586 at page 589 is that where rights arising out of an agreement for sale have not been given up the sellers are constantly under an obligation to deliver a flat to the buyer and in such a case it may be treated that cause of action is a continuing cause of action. The payment received by the OPs from the complainant have not been so far been refunded and the flat for which the said payment was made has not been delivered to the complainant. The OPs are still holding money given by the complainant under an agreement. The complainant has a continuing cause of action against the OPs.

Such being the position the application for condonation of delay stands allowed. The Miscellaneous Application being no.MA/13/2021 is thus disposed off.

The complaint case is admitted and be registered.

Fix 02.05.22 for hearing of the MA/92/2021.

Dictated and Corrected by

[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Silpi Majumder]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Partha Kumar Basu]
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.