JUDGEMENT

          Complainantby filing this complaint has submitted thathe was looking for an accommodation to purchase for his family in a good locality and accordingly after getting such information he met with op and expressed his desire to purchase a flat along with garage space and on representation of the ops and also considering the plan sanctioned by Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) in respect of the development of the premises No. 19A, Chowdhury Lane, under Police Station Shyampukur, Kolkata – 700004, complainant desired to purchase the flat along with garage space and op also assured that he shall have to execute any deed of sale in both garage spaces and flat on receipt of Rs. 12 lakhs and superbuilt area of the flat is 833 sq. ft. for which complainant shall have to pay a total consideration of Rs. 9 lakhs and Rs. 3 lakhs for two garages and accordingly complainant already paid Rs. 12 lakhs for purchase of the said flat along two garage spaces and on receipt of the said and acknowledgement of the said, the op executed the sale deed on 04.07.2005 in respect of the flat which was duly registered in Book No. I, Volume No. 1, Pages-1 to 26 and being no. 00874 for the year 2006 with the office A.R.A. II, Calcutta by delivery of vacant khas possession of the said flat and op has also khas possession of the garage spaces where complainant has been parking his car without registering the deed of sale in respect of garage spaces because op assured in respect of the garage spaces which shall be executed and after completion of the deed of sale in respect of the flat op delayed to execute the sale deed in respect of garage spaces.

          But op assured that there shall have no problem in executing of sale deed in respect of the said garage spaces when delivery of the khas possession had already been made after entire payment of the consideration amount in the manner aforesaid in respect said garages and complainant relied upon the assurances and commitment of the op had been executed the said deed in respect of garage spaces.  Though op executed the sale deed in respect of garage spaces of other flat owners also.  But the ops evading and avoiding to register the deed of sale for the reason best known to the op.  So, op has sent a Lawyer’s letter to the op on 13.08.2013 asking the op to execute the sale deed.  But that letter was returned with note “not known” that means refused to acceptit and by that act op no doubt has committed unfair trade practice and also for his deficient and negligent manner of service of sale deed in respect of the said two garage spaces which has not been executed as yet by the ops and in the above circumstances complainant has prayed for relief and redressal against the ops.

          But the notices of this case were duly served upon the op nos. 1 to 3 which is evident from the postal track report and truth is that same have been sent by registered post with A/D and same are in record, but ops did not turn up to contest.  But even then on 16.09.2014 the date was fixed for filing written version by the ops if any.  But on 16.09.2014 ops did not turn up even after repeated call and no step was taken by the ops and no written version was also filed.  So, the case is fixed for evidence in chief by the complainant.  Evidence in chief was filed by the complainant prior to that evidence in chief was sent to the ops by speed post and it was served upon the ops, even after that ops did not turn up which is evident from the record.  So, accordingly the case was heard exparte and argument was heard from the complainant’s side.

          In view of the above position after considering the entire materials on record, we are entering into the dispose of this case in exparte form considering the negative attitude of the ops for not contesting the case even after receipt of notice of this complaint and also evidence in chief of this complaint filed by the complainant.

Decision with reasons

          On proper study of the complaint and also considering the material documents as filed by the complainant it is clear that complainant paid Rs. 12 lakhs and out of that total amount Rs. 9 lakhs was paid for the purpose of the flat and Rs. 3 lakhs was paid for the purpose of two garage spaces.  Truth is that ops particularly M/s Sarathi Construction Company received the entire amount and ultimately executed final deed of sale in respect of the flat in favour of the complainant Siddhartha Bhar on 04.07.2005.  But anyhow it is undisputed fact that complainant has been possessing the two car parking spaces in the said building, but as yet no deed of sale has yet been executed.  Complainant has also filed such documents to show that in respect of car parking spaces the other person sale deed has been executed and to prove that one sale deed dated 21.12.2011 is proved wherefrom it is found that ops executed the sale deed in respect of one car parking spaces in favour of Sudip Kumar Mitra the another flat owner.  But no doubt the ops have received Rs. 3 lakhs for two car parking spaces but has not executed the sale deed as yet the possession with the complainant which is proved.

          No doubt complainant’s notice of the complaint was sent to the op and op received it which is proved from the postal track record but they did not turn up to contest or challenge the complaint or the allegation and when the case was fixed for exparte hearing, complainant prior to his submission of evidence in chief sent a copy of evidence in chief to the ops by registered post with A/D (Speed Post) that was also received by the op but op did not turn up.

          Then it is clear that op has received Rs. 3 lakhs for two car parking spaces and have not yet executed the sale deed in respect of that car parking spaces which is unchallenged testimony and document is here and there that op received Rs. 3 lakhs for the said car parking spaces i.e. for Rs. 1,50,000/- per car parking space.

          From another document deed of sale in respect of car parking space in favour of Sudip Kumar Mitra dated 21.12.2011, it is proved.  Op sold one car parking space at a cost of Rs. 1,50,000/- and relying upon that document, it is clear that op received Rs. 3 lakhs at a time from the complainant for two car parking spaces but no sale deed has yet been executed by the ops which is no doubt unfair trade practice on the part of the ops and fact remains that ops do notwant to execute the sale deed in respect of two car parking spaces which are in confirm possession of the complainant as yet and complainant has been using the said two car parking spaces by placing his car and in view of the above fact and circumstances and also considering the negative attitude of the ops, the developer and owners we are convinced to hold that the act on the part of the op is no doubt unfair trade practice and fact remains for the negative attitude of the ops, complainanthas been suffering mentally and physically also and truth is that for long period even after payment of the entire consideration for the two car parking spaces, complainant has not got registered sale deed from the ops which is no doubt negligent and deficient manner of service on the part of the op and no doubt for harassing the complainant in so many manner with some ill purpose and motive.

          In the light of the above findings, we are inclined to hold that complainant is entitled to get a decree as prayed for when the entire allegation as made by the complainant against ops is proved beyond any manner of doubt by unchallenged testimony of the complainant and also the document as filed by the complainant.

          Thus the complaint succeeds in exparte form.

          Hence, it is

ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is allowed exparte with cost of Rs. 5,000/- against the ops.

          Ops are jointly and severally are hereby directed to execute the sale deed in respect of two car parking spaces (for which ops have already received Rs. 3,00,000/- from the complainant) within one month from the date of this order failing which for non-execution of the deed of sale in favour of the complainant in respect of the said two car parking spaces as per schedule of the complaint, the ops shall have to pay penal damages  at the rate  Rs. 20,000/- per month from the stipulated date till execution of the sale deed by the ops and if ops are found reluctant to execute the deed of sale in that case complainant shall have to make such a prayer before this Forum for execution and registration of the sale deed through this Forum by paying all costs to be borne by the complainant for the purpose of the execution of the sale deed and also for payment of service charge for registration and execution of the same by the Office staff of this Forum and service charges amount shall be paid by the complainant to the such officer who shall be deputedby this Forum for presenting and executing the sale deed on behalf of the Forum.

          Ops are directed to comply the order very strictly failing which for non-compliance of Forum’s order penal action shall be started and for which they shall be responsible and further fine and penalty shall be imposed against them.