Sri Ashoke Kumar Pal, President
The case of the complainants in short is that the Complainant intended to purchase a flat from the OPs at a valuable consideration of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees six lakhs) and entered into an agreement for sale (Annexure ”C”) and paid Rs.5,50,000/- (Rupees five lakhs and fifty thousand) to the OP No.1. The OP No.1 acknowledged the receipt of the same by issuing money receipt (Annexure ‘D’). The OP No.1 handed over the possession of the flat in the month of October, 2008. After getting possession, the complainant started residing there having electrical connection, gas service etc. The description of the Flat is more fully described in Schedule A of the petition of complaint. The OPs altogether assured the complainants that they will execute and register a proper deed of conveyance shortly after receiving the balance consideration amount and also hand over possession letter and completion certification along with lift service but ultimately they avoided the requests of the complainant by this way or that and also did not complete the pending works of the scheduled flat and did not execute and register a proper deed of conveyance. In the meantime on 15.01.2021 the developer Samir Chatterjee died leaving behind his legal heirs and successors who are now running M/S Krishna Enterprise. The complainants filed a complainant before the Assistant Director Consumer Affairs and Fair Business Practice, South 24-Pgs at Baruipur but no fruitful result could be achieved. The OP ultimately failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement for sale and also failed to execute and register a deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants which prompted the complainants to file the instant complaint case.
The OPs contested the case by filing W/V challenging the maintainability of the case contending that the statements and allegations made by complainants in the petition of complainant are all false. The specific case of the OPs is that the instant complaint case is barred by law of limitation. The complainants did not pay the balance consideration amount even after getting possession of the flat and for which registration of the flat was not done. It was also contended that there is no pending works in the said flat which was handed over to the complainants in fully habitable condition. As such there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. The OPs also denied the other material averment of the petition of complaint parawise and prayed for dismissal of the complaint case with a cost.
Points for consideration:-
- Are the complainants consumers?
- Are the O.Ps. guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice?
- Are the complainants entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:-
Point No. 1 : - On perusal of the case record along with the documents it appears that the complainants intending to purchase a flat entered into an agreement with the OPS on 31.10.2007 and paid Rs.5,50,000/- (Rupees five lakhs and fifty thousand) out of total consideration amount of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees six lakhs). The OPs issued money receipt for the same. Therefore, complainants are consumers as defined under Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
As such Point No.1 is decided in favour of the complainants and against the OPs.
Point No.2:- The complainants booked the scheduled flat and entered into an agreement on 31.10.2007 with the OP to that effect. But the complainants made payment of Rs.5,50,000/- out of total consideration amount of Rs.6,00,000/- and the OPs acknowledged the receipt of the same by issuing money receipt. The complainants filed copy of the money receipts along with petition of complaint from which it appears that all the payments have been made properly. On the other hand despite payment of earnest money by the complainants as per terms of the agreement dated 31.10.2007 the OPs failed and neglected to complete the pending works of the schedule flat and to execute and register a proper deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants. The complainants requested the OPs several times to complete the pending works of the scheduled flat and execute and register a proper deed of conveyance of the complainants. Therefore it is clear from the averment of the complainant that the OPs are guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
As such the Point No.2 is also decided in favour of the complainants and against the OPs.
Point No.3:- The complainants booked the scheduled flat from the OPs and made payment of Rs.5,50,000/- out of total consideration amount of Rs.6,00,00/- (Rupees six lakhs) on different dates. But the OPs violated the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 31.10.2007. Neither the OPs completed the pending works of the scheduled flat nor executed and registered a proper deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants as per terms of the agreement for sale dated 31.10.2007. Therefore, as the complainants did not get any positive response from the OPs they have been compelled to file the present case against the OP on the relief as sought for in the petition of complaint. As the OPs did not complete the pending works of the scheduled flat nor a proper deed of conveyance has been executed and registered in favour of the complainants, the complainants failed to get satisfactory service from the OPs. On the other hand, the complainants were harassed by the OPs by various ways. Therefore, the complainants are entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
The OPs argued that possession of the flat in habitable condition was handed over in October, 2008 and the instant suit has been filed on 22.02.2021 i.e. long after 12 years. And as such the instant case is barred by law of limitation. In support of their argument, the OPs referred a decision reported in 2015 (4) CPR 98(NC). But on careful scrutiny it appears that the facts and circumstances of the said reported case is different from the instant complaint case and as such the same is not applicable in our case.
So, Point No.3 is thus decided in favour of the complainants and against the OPs.
In the result, the complaint case succeeds.
Fees paid is correct.
Hence, it is,
ORDERED
That the instant case be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against the OPs. with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only.
The OP Nos.1 to 7 are jointly or severally liable and directed to hand over the completion certificate of the schedule flat after completion of the pending works and to execute and register a proper deed of conveyance in respect of the scheduled flat in favour of the complainants in terms of the agreement for sale dated 31.10.2007 after receiving the balance consideration amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) from the complainants within 60 days from the date of passing this order.
The OP Nos.1-7 are jointly and severally liable and also directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) for mental pain and agony, delay and harassment suffered by the complainants within 60 days from the date of passing this order.
The OPs are jointly and severally liable and also directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) within 60 days from the date of passing this order.
The complainants are at liberty to put the order into execution after the expiry of 60 days if the order is not complied with by the OP within 60 days from the date of passing this order.
Let a copy of the order be supplied free of cost to both the parties as per rules.
The Final order will be made available in www.confonet.nic.in .
Dictated and corrected by me
Ashoke Kumar Pal
President
