Smt. Kabita  Singh,

w/o. Saikat Singh,

residing at 30/10, Mirpara Road,

P.O. Bhattanagar, P.S. Liluah,

District – Howrah.------------------------------------------------------------ COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.      Nav  Durga Constructions,

a registered partnership firm,

having its office at 51/1/C, Rabindra Sarani,

P.S. LIluah, District – Howrah,

represented by its partners –

( i )       Sri Praveen Kumar Koushik,

             son of Sri Iswar Sharma, residing at 51/1/C, Rabindra Sarani, P.O. & P.S. Liluah, District – Howrah,

( ii )      Sri Sumanta Sarkar,

            son of Sri Samir Krishna Sarkar alias Samir Sarkar, residing at 64/3/A, Rabindra Sarani, P.O. & P.S. Liluah, District – Howrah, PIN – 711204.

2.      Sri Samar  Roy  Choudhury,

3.      Sri Balai  Roy  Chowdhury,

4.      Sri Amar Roy  Choudhury,

O.P. nos. 2 to 4 sons of late Gurupada Roy  Choudhury, residing at 349,     Bhattanagar, Liluah, P.S. Liluah, District – Howrah, PIN – 711203. -----------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                P    R    E     S    E    N     T

President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

Member      :      Shri P.K. Chatterjee.

Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1.                  The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986

wherein the complainant has   prayed for direction upon the o.ps. to execute and register the sale deed with respect to the schedule mentioned flat in terms of the agreement dated 06-11-2012 in favour of the complainant and to pay a compensation to the tune Rs. 8 lakhs and litigation costs of Rs. 2 lakhs as the O.Ps. in spite of repeated requests did not execute and register the deed in question in spite of receiving Rs. 3,08,000/- out of the total of Rs. 5,32,400/-.

2.                  The o.ps. in the written version contended interalia that the complainant  is   

not ready and willing to purchase the flat; that the agreement was cancelled ; that the complainant did not pay the balance consideration money. So the complaint should be dismissed.

3.         Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

ii)                  Whether the complainant is   entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

4.      Both the points are  taken up together for consideration. The agreement dated 06-

11-2012 reveals that the O.Ps. entered into an agreement with the complainant for sale of the schedule mentioned property at a consideration of Rs. 5,32,400/- for a flat measuring 400 sq. ft. It is further revealed from the enclosures that Rs. 3,08,000/- was paid in cash and only Rs. 2,24,400/- remains balance consideration money. Though the O.Ps. dispute the payment of Rs. 3,08,000/- the money receipts confirm that the same was received by the O.Ps. The reason as shown by the O.Ps. that the complainant is not willing to purchase the flat appears to be too fragile to merit acceptance. On her repeated requests the O.Ps. turned  deaf ears and it appears that they are in no mode to execute and register the sale deed with respect to the flat in favour of the complainant. Since the major portion of the consideration money has been paid to the O.Ps. and only Rs. 2,24,400/- remains due, the O.Ps. cannot have any escape from the rigours of the law. This is a case where gross deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. crept in. This is a fit case where the prayer of the complainant shall be allowed. Both the points are accordingly disposed of.    

      Hence,

O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 209  of 2013 ( HDF  209 of 2013 )  be and the same is  allowed on contest as  against  the O.Ps. with  costs. 

      The O.Ps. be directed to execute and register proper sale deed in favour of the complainant in terms of the agreement dated 06-11-2012 within 30 days from the date of this order after receiving the balance amount of  Rs. 2,24,400/- from the complainant.

      The o.ps. be further directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant  for causing mental pain, agony  and prolonged harassment.

      The complainant is  also entitled to a litigation cost of Rs. 3,000/-.

      The complainant is  at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME. 

  (    T.K. Bhattacharya  )                                              

 President,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.