Date of filing: 01/10/2021

Date of Judgment : 06/10/2023

Mr. Sudip Niyogi, Hon’ble President

                                                                 BRIEF FACT

The complainant on 16/03/2008 had entered into one agreement for sale with OP No.1 who is the developer in respect of the property as mentioned in the schedule, following the developer’s agreement with OP No.2 & 3 who are the land owners, to purchase one self contained flat measuring 744 sq ft super built in area on the ground floor at premises No.191 Srirampore (North), P.S.Jadavpur, Kolkata-700084 at a consideration of Rs.7,60,000/-. He paid Rs.6,60,000/- towards consideration of the flat and remaining Rs.1,00,000/- to be paid by him.  In the month of December after a lot of persuasion, opposite party gave possession of his flat to him but despite repeated requests, no deed of conveyance was executed and registered by the OPs, though he was ready always to pay the balance amount of consideration. Complainant also issued a notice, through his advocate requiring the OPs for registration of a deed of conveyance on payment of balance consideration but nothing was done. Alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency in service against the OPs, this complaint was filed seeking several relief(s).

OP No.1 by filing one written version, contested this case denying the allegations of the complainant that he had paid an amount of Rs.6,60,000/- towards consideration or that they had delivered possession on their own to the complainant. They prayed for dismissal of the instant complaint.

OP No.2 & 3 in their written version stated to comply with the order of this commission.

Both parties filed evidence, Questionnaires and Replies thereto and also the written notices of arguments.

Now, the point for consideration is if the complainant is entitled to any relief(s) in this case.

                                                                  FINDINGS

We have gone through the materials in record including the documents filed on behalf of the complainant.

Admittedly there was an agreement dtd. 16.03.2008 between the complainant and OP No.1/Developer whereby complainant had agreed to buy the flat in question from the developer’s allocation at a consideration of Rs.6,60,000/-. It is also admitted that subsequently complainant got possession of the said flat though OP No.1/developer claimed that the possession was forcibly taken by the complainant. It is also admitted that no deed of conveyance was made in respect of the said flat of the complainant.

According to the complainant he paid Rs.6,60,000/- to the OP1/developer on consideration but OP claimed that Rs.5,00,000/- was paid to him.  In this regard Ld Advocate for OP-1 drew our attention at Page No.11 of the said agreement for sale wherefrom it is found that in all Rs.5,00,000/- was paid to OP No.1.  It is further found that on 16/3/2008, Rs.3,50,000/- was paid along with another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on the same date and on 17/3/2008 a sum of Rs.50,000/- was paid thus totalling an amount of 5,00,000/-. There is no denial of this payment having been received by the developer. 

Ld Advocate for the complainant claimed by pointing out Annexure-E which is found to be attached with the agreement for sale showing payments on different dates of Rs.1,60,000/- in total.

The OP No.1 denied the contention of these payments of Rs.1,60,000/- which is found to be the bone of contention between the parties and we find after each payment the signature of one ‘Baidya’ is there.  Now the OP No.1 had claimed the said ‘Baidya’ to whom the complainant claimed to have paid the amounts, is not related to him.  In this connection, the complainant also failed to give any particulars of said ‘Baidya’ to whom the amount of Rs.1,60,000/-was paid or his relation with OP No.1. In this premises, we cannot accept this payment of Rs.1,60,000/- in total were actually made to the developer.  Therefore the complainant is liable to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,60,000/- to OP No.1 before or at the time of  registration of the deed of conveyance in his favour.

Complainant also prayed for completion certificate, possession and cost of litigation. Complainant claimed compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for not making the deed of conveyance in his favour.  Though complainant agreed to have obtained possession of the flat in 2008, but not a single scrap of paper was produced by him to show that immediately on getting possession of the flat and prior to the notice issued through his advocate before filing of this case, he had issued any other notice requiring the OP for making deed of conveyance.  Therefore we are not going to allow his prayer for compensation in this case. However he is entitled to get a deed of conveyance in his favour along with cost of litigation of Rs,5,000/- and  the entire cost of execution and registration of the deed has to be borne by him. 

Accordingly, it is

                                                 ORDERED

that the instant complaint case being CC No.483/21 is allowed on contest against the Opposite Parties.

OPs are directed to execute and register a deed of conveyance in respect of the scheduled flat in favour of the complainant in accordance with the agreement dtd 16.03.2008 on payment of balance consideration of Rs.2,60,000/- by the complainant and the cost in this regard shall be borne by the complainant.  OPs are also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant for cost of litigation.

The OPs are directed to comply with this order within 30 days from the date of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with Law.

Dictated and corrected by me

President