West Bengal

Rajarhat

RBT/CC/95/2020

Sri Sankar Das S/o Late Harendra Chandra Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Mr. Prosenjit Sarkar

29 Nov 2021

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
 
Complaint Case No. RBT/CC/95/2020
 
1. Sri Sankar Das S/o Late Harendra Chandra Das
Residing at 36/1, Nalta Kalibari Road, P.O- Dum Dum Cantonment, P.S- Dum Dum, Kolkata-700028.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/s. Sarada Construction
Having its Office at 90/1, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Road, Dum Dum Cantonment, P.S- Dum Dum, Kolkata-700028.
2. Smt . Pratima Sarkar D/o Late Sushil Kumar Paul(Represented by its Proprietor)
Residing at 90/1, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Road, Dum Dum Cantonment, P.S- Dum Dum, Kolkata-700028.
3. Smt. Keya Dey W/o Sri Goutam Dey
Residing at194, Kalibari Road, P.O- Dum Dum Cantonment, P.S- Dum Dum, Kolkata-700028.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Silpi Majumder MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 29 Nov 2021
Final Order / Judgement
  1. This is an application of Sri Sankar Das under Section 12 of the Act seeking direction of this Commission to the Ops for execution and registration of Sale Deed in respect to a flat being number GC at measuring 750sq ft. constructed 36/1, Nalta Kalibari Road, P.S- Dumdum, Kolkata- 700028, on the averment that the Ops being developers received a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- for the aforesaid flat and neglected to hand over the same on receipt of the balance amount.
  2. It is the next case of the complainant that under agreement dt. 12.02.2013 in respect to the aforesaid parties which were entered into by and between the complainants and the developers. It was settled that the flat would cost Rs. 7,87,500/- and the same would be delivered after completion of the construction thereof. It is the next case of the complainant that the developers have completed the construction work by 26.11.2014, but neither executed the balance amount from the complainant, nor deliver the flat by executing an registering the Sale Deed. This is why he has filed this case.
  3. The developers have abstained from contesting the case, for which the case was heard ex parte.
  4. In support of his case, the complainant has filed the development agreement dt. 12.02.2013. The agreement dt. 12.02.2013 carries an acknowledgement for the payment of Rs. 4,50,000/-. Had they got any other case to put up as against the complainants the developers would have contested the case. Mere abstention of the developers from the arena of this case speaks volumes for the genuineness of the case of the complainant.
  5. Undisputedly, the payment of Rs. 4,50,000/- was made by the complainant for the aforesaid flat as per agreement. The developers were under contractual obligation to finish the construction work within the time as provided under agreement and to legally hand over the flat to the complainant after accepting the balance amount, but it is in the affidavit of the complainant that the developers have neither accepted the balance amount, nor exposed their desire to hand over the said flat.
  6. The aforesaid transaction related to 4,50,000/- was made on 12.02.2013. Much water have flown in the river of Ganges in the meantime. It is most unlikely that the developer who has turned their eyes from the complainant are still having the said property under free occupation. It goes without saying that the developers have somehow created third party interest therein. Such being the position, we are reluctant to record an order for execution and registration of the Sale Deed in respect to the aforesaid flat in favour of the complainant. Rather, we choose to record an  order for refund of the amount received by them together with interest, compensation and litigation cost.
  7. The complainant has suffered harassment for last nine years at the hands of the Op. He had to run from pillar to posts for getting back his money. The developers have unduly used money received from the complainant. Therefore, they should be under an order for payment for interest @ Rs. 11% from 12.02.2013 till realization. The complainant is supposed to incur lot of expenses to proceed with the litigation for the last nine years. He should be awarded with sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of litigation cost. Considering the harassment and agony he has suffered, a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- should be awarded as compensation.
  8. Therefore, the developers would pay Rs. 4,50,000/- together with interest @ 11% plus Rs. 1,00,000/- for litigation cost and 2,00,000/- for compensation.
  9. Hence it is ordered that the case be and the same is allowed ex parte.  The developers will pay a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- together with interest 11% p.a. from 12.02.2013 till realization. They will also pay Rs. 1,00,000/- for litigation and 2,00,000/- compensation within 1 month hence. Failing which the amount will accrue interest @12% p.a.

          Let plain copy be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR. 

 

Dictated and corrected by

[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Silpi Majumder]
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.