1.      Rebati Panja,

wife of Bimal Panja,

2.      Barnali Panja,

d/o. Bimal Panja,

3.      Kuheli Senapati ( Panja ),

wife of Sourav Senapati,

daughter of Bimal Panja,

residing at 38/1, Kalachand Nandy Lane,

P.O. Circular  Road, P.S. Bantra,

District – Howrah,

PIN – 711101. ---------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANTS.

-          Versus   -

Prabir Dey,

son of Prasanta Dey,

residing at Baltikuri, Onkar Aloy,

First Floor, Flat No. 1E, P.S. Jagacha,

District – Howrah,

Howrah – 711302.------------------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTY.

                                                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 complainants U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986

wherein the complainants have  prayed for direction upon the o.p. to  return Rs. 2 lakhs obtained by the O.P. for agreement for sale with litigation costs of  Rs. 10,000/- together with  compensation as the O.P. in spite of receiving the advance money of Rs 2 lakhs as per agreement dated 03-05-2013 for selling the flat as mentioned in para 1 of the petition, did not ultimately sell the same, nor did he execute the proper deed of conveyance.

2.                  The o.p. in his  written version contended interalia that the complainants

ultimately stepped aside to purchase the flat and that the O.P. is willing to sell the same.  

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

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

ii)                  Whether the complainants are  entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

4.      Both the points are  taken up together for consideration. Admittedly the parties

entered into an agreement on 03-05-2013 for sale of the flat being no. 1E on the 1^st floor as mentioned in para 1 of the complaint at a consideration of  Rs. 12,75,000/- and the O.P. received 2 lakhs as advance money. Subsequently on inspection the complainants found the flat totally incomplete having no water and electric connection. On their repeated requests the O.P. turned a deaf ear. Sensing total non-cooperation, the complainants now prays for total refund of the money paid as advance. On scrutiny of the enclosures it appears that it is a fit case where the prayer of the complainants shall be allowed.

      Both the points are accordingly disposed of. 

      Hence,

O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No.248  of 2013 ( HDF 248 of 2013 )  be  and the same is allowed on contest with costs as against the O.P.

      The O.P. be directed to refund Rs. 2 lakhs to the complainants together with interest @ 9% per annum since 03-05-2013 till full payment within  30 days from the date of this order.

      The o.p. do  pay a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the complainants for  causing mental pain and prolonged harassment and litigation costs of Rs. 5,000/-.  

            The complainants are 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  )                                               (    T.K. Bhattacharya  )

  President,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                                   President, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.

 (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                              (  P. K. Chatterjee )

 Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                                       Member,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.