Order No. 35  Dated 21.05.2018

The record is taken up for passing order in respect of petition filed by the JDR, in which he stated that in compliance to the order of this Forum dated 25.09.2012 he appeared before the ADSR, Uttarpara on 30.05.2017 following the order of this Forum dated 11.05.2017 in c/w EA No. 48/2013 to execute the deed in favour of complainant/DHR. But the DHR and his Advocate stated that they will not comply the order dated 25.09.2012 but they will only concern with the registration. So they performed the execution and registration of said deed in favour of the DHR/complainant in presence of three representatives of this Forum. So, he was ready and willing to comply the order but the complainant

with the intention to get mala fide gain did not comply the order. The DHR/complainant namely Pranab Kr. Chakraborty files a petition on 23.11.2017 stating that a deed of conveyance executed and registered on 30.05.2017 vide deed no. 062101486 for the year 2017 in which the petitioner paid the stamp duty of assessed market value of Rs. 32,32,000/- before the ADSR through the order of C.C. Court. He also stated that JDR Narayan Kangsabanik was not present before the Registrar at the time of registration or presentation of the deed of conveyance in which ADSR, Uttarpara as per vide order no. 29  dated 11.05.2017. Later he came to know that Power of Attornye as executed earlier in favour of Narayan Kangsabanik already been revoked and cancelled by way of revocation of instrument dated 24.04.2008. So Narayan Kangsabanik has no locus standi to sign or claim anything in which Narayan Kangsabanik purposely and motivatedly was not present before the Registering Authority. The plea raised by Narayan Kangsabanik which is not tenable in view of execution of registration of deed of conveyance and has been possessed by decree holder. If any grievance raised by anybody only before Civil Court as title and cancellation of any instrument do not come within the purview of Consumer Forum. The Final Order of CC Case No. 114/2009 has modified nor set aside by any Forum or Appellate Court. So, this Forum cannot go beyond the Final Order dated 25.09.2012. The registering authority after scrutinizing the order no. 29 dated 11.05.2007 permitted the authorised person to perform the work of registration execution.

After hearing the parties and perusing the petition and also the order dated 11.05.2017 of this Forum in c/w EA 48/2013 it appears that complainant files a petition dated 05.05.2017 for passing an order of execution and registration deed of conveyance in favour of petitioner and prays to appoint the officers of this Forum through which the parties would register the shop room. The OP raised no objection. On consent of both sides prayer was allowed and this Forum appointed two employees of this Forum to assist the parties for registration. But facts remains that DHR by the strength of order dated 11.05.2017 executed and registered the impugned deed in favour of him keeping aside the judgement debtor no. 2, i.e., Narayan Kangsabanik.

We are in the opinion that the petition dated 31.05.2017 filed by the JDR No. 2 has no merit and deserves to be rejected.

Accordingly, the Execution Case being no. 48/2013 is dropped in accordance with the prayer of the DHR filed on 23.11.2017.