SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA,MEMBER
The instant revision petition has been filed by the revisionists/complainants against the OPs challenging the order dated 26.02.2021 in MA case No. 19 of 2021 arising out of CC/51/2021 passed by the Ld. District Commission South 24 Parganas, Barasat.
Complainants have filed one complaint case being No. CC/51/2021 against the Ops praying for direction upon OPs to handover the possession of the subject flat and car parking space in terms of the agreement for sale dated 07.12.2019 by executing the registered deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants and also to direct the Ops to handover the completion certificate of the building to the complainants along with compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.50,000/-. Thereafter, complainants filed one MA application being No. MA/19/2021 praying for passing an ex parte ad interim order restraining the OPs from transferring, parting with possession or creating any third party interest with respect to the said flat and car parking space during the pendency of the instant case till the disposal of the complaint case for the interest of justice. The Ld. Counsel for the complainants has submitted that the complainants are the intending purchasers, they entered into an agreement for sale with the Ops on 07.12.2019 with the OPs No. 1 to 3 for purchasing a self-contained flat for a consideration of Rs.23,50,225/- along with a car parking space on the first floor being No. P-3 measuring more or less 100 sq. ft. for a consideration of Rs.2,50,000/-. Ld. Advocate for the complainants has drew our attention by showing running page 73 of the revision petition wherefrom it is evident that garage No. ‘3’ on the ground floor measuring an area of 133.25 sq. ft. and super built area of 160 sq. ft. has been sold to a third party by executing a deed of conveyance dated 30.07.2020, therefore, the complainants have apprehended that the garage has been sold out to a third party. Moreover, that the Ld. Advocate for the complainants has also drew our attention by showing the letter dated 4th February, 2021 wherefrom it is evident that the Ops are demanding Rs.22,00,000/- from the complainants (running page 53 of the Revision Petition) whereas deed of conveyance for the car parking space has been executed much earlier. Therefore, it is very much necessary for the interim injunction for restraining the OPs not to transfer or alienate the property to any third party for which property, the complainants have entered into the sale agreement.
On the other hand, Ld. Advocate for the OPs No. 1, 2 & 3 has submitted that as per agreement for sale, the complainants are bound to pay the consideration amount within 12 months from the date of entering into the agreement. But till date, the complainants have paid only Rs.4,00,000/- as advance amount of Rs.4,00,000/- on the date of entering into the agreement of sale. The OPs are doing a business, they cannot wait for inordinate period for the complainants who failed to pay the consideration amount towards the flat and the car parking space. They are always ready to return Rs.4,00,000/- which was paid as advance amount. If the interim injunction is passed against the Ops then it will cost irreparable loss and injury to the OPs. Therefore, the Ld. District Commission has rightly rejected the interim injunction filed by the complainants.
None appeared on behalf OPs No. 4, 5, 6 & 7 on the date of hearing of the instant Revision Petition.
Heard the complainants, OPs No. 1, 2 & 3 and on careful perusal of the record, we have observed that the complainants have failed to pay consideration amount as per agreement for sale. Moreover, complainants have annexed a document that they have made a complaint before the concerned police station but no annexure has been filed with the MA application filed before the Ld. District Commission praying for interim injunction. Nowhere, in the complaint petition, complainants have stated that they have failed to pay consideration amount within the stipulated period as per agreement of sale. Therefore, in the instant case, complainants have not come with clean hands. Ld. Counsel for the complainants has failed to produce any document in support of his argument that the OPs No. 1, 2 & 3/developers have tried to sell the property for which the complainants have to suffer irreparable loss and injury. Moreover, the complainants have not paid the consideration amount as per terms and conditions of the agreement for sale. The terms and conditions of the agreement for sale are binding upon both the parties. We have to consider equitable relief for both the parties. The necessity of filing the interim injunction petition depends upon the prima facie case, balance of convenience and inconvenience and if there is any chance that the petitioner would suffer irreparable loss and injury. We do not find any covert act for which the complainants have to suffer irreparable loss and injury if the interim injunction has not been granted for the schedule property in question.
In view of above, the Ld. District Commission has rightly observed that the complainant has filed the petition, praying for interim injunction, upon mere apprehension of mind and we also do not find any irregularity, impropriety or illegality in the impugned order passed by the Ld. District Commission. Therefore, the revision petition is liable to be rejected.
The revision petition being No. 31 of 2021 is dismissed on contest.
The Ld. District Commission is requested to dispose of the case as expeditiously as practicable by not giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the Ld. District Commission, North 24 Parganas for their information.
