HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL, PRESIDENT

1. This complaint case under section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ( in short, ‘the Act’) has been filed against the opposite parties praying for the following reliefs :-

“a) To admit the complaint and be pleased to issue notice by showing cause to the Opposite Parties as to why the prayer of the complainants shall not be allowed.

b) To refund the remaining amount of Rs.3,40,000/- from the Concerned Opposite Party.

c) To direct the Opposite Parties to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for causing physical and mental harassment to the complainants and Rs.25,000/- for litigation cost to the complainants.

d) To pass any further order or orders, direction or directions as Your Honour may deem fit and proper.”

2. Briefly stated the complaint case in short is that the complainant booked a 2 (two) Cottah land with bungalow (unit C-8) in Royal Project at Hatisalamore on 05.09.2015 at a consideration of Rs.31,00,000/-. The complainant made payment of Rs.6,20,000/- for the said bungalow as booking money vide cheques dated 05/09/2015, 18/09/2015 and 06/04/2016 and the said cheques were cleared on 18/09/2015, 06/10/2015 and 11/05/2016. Out of the said three cheques one of which bearing No. 658086 dated 05/09/2015 was paid to Dharitri Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. and the money receipt was issued by Royal Infra Developer.

3. Further case of the complainant is that the complainant visited the project site many times but no construction work started till 16/02/2018. As such the complainant requested to the opposite party No. 1 to return the booking amount of Rs.6,20,000/-. Accordingly, the developer issued 4 post dated cheques in favour of the complainant and the complainant received these cheques on 02/05/2018.

4. Further case of the complainant is that all the 4 cheques issued by the developer were dishonoured. Thereafter, the complainant got Rs.2,80,000/- in different instalments after making request again and again to the developer. Out of the total Rs.6,20,000/-, Rs.3,40,000/- is still due which the opposite parties are not paying to the complainant. The complainant approached to the office of the Assistant Director, Salt Lake Regional Office, Consumer Affairs and Fair Business Practice, Govt. of West Bengal, Salt Lake, Kolkata – 700 064 with complaint Index No. CICC/ROSL/496/18-19 but to no effect. Hence, the complainant was compelled to file the present case.

5. Notices were duly issued upon the opposite parties but the opposite parties did not turn up and did not contest the case. As such, the case was proceeded ex parte against all the opposite parties.

6. The complainant filed evidence on affidavit. Now, the points for consideration are that :-

i) Whether the complaint is maintainable ?

ii) Whether there is any deficiency in service ?

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

iv) What other relief / reliefs, if any, is the complainant is entitled to get ?

Decisions with reasons :-

7. All these four issues are taken up together for consideration for their brevity and their interrelatedness.

8. Having heard the Learned Advocate appearing for the complainant and on perusal of the record and the brief notes of argument filed on behalf of the complainant it appears to me that the complainant has produced the evidence on affidavit in support of his case. There appears to be no contradiction in the evidence of the complainant. The opposite parties did not appear and did not file any questionnaire against the evidence on affidavit filed by the complainant. As such, the evidence of the complainant remains unchallenged. Therefore, I hold that the evidence of the complainant has been duly corroborated the facts of the complaint case.

9. Annexure ‘A’ series annexed to the petition of complaint disclose that the complainant applied for provisional allotment and booked one bungalow (unit No. C-8) in Royal Project namely Royal Enclave at Hatisalamore on 05/09/2015 at a consideration of Rs.31,00,000/-.

10. Annexure ‘B’ series are the copy of the money receipts which disclose that the complainant made payment of Rs.6,20,000/- as booking money through 3 (three) cheques and all the cheques were drawn on SBI in favour of the developer.

11. Annexure ‘C’ is the copy of the Broker details which discloses that as per direction of the developer cheque being No. 658086 dated 05/09/2015 was paid to the Dharitri Infrastucture Pvt. Ltd. and money receipt was issued by Royal Infra Developer.

12. Annexure ‘D’ is the copy of the intimation letter which discloses that the complainant received one intimation letter dated 22/01/2016 from Royal Infra Developer, opposite party No. 1 wherein the opposite party No. 1 expressed its pleasure to the complainant regarding booking of the said bungalow with a payment of Rs.3,10,000/- out of the total consideration of Rs.31,00,000/-.

13. Annexure ‘E’ is the copy of the letter issued by the complainant which discloses that the complainant cancelled the booking of the said bungalow as no construction work was started and by the said letter the complainant prayed for making necessary arrangement for refund of the amount of Rs.6,20,000/-.

14. Annexure ‘G’ is the copy of the letter issued by the complainant addressed to the Assistant Director, Regional Office, Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices dated 03/01/2019.

15. Annexure ‘H’ is the copy of the letter issued by the complainant which discloses that the complainant requested the opposite parties to refund a sum of Rs.3,40,000/- on 14/12/2018.

16. Annexure ‘I’ is the copy of the letter issued by the Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices, Salt Lake Regional Office which discloses that the Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices fixed a date on 13/06/2019 for resolving the dispute through the process of mediation.

17. Annexure ‘F’ series are the copy of cheques issued by Royal Infraventure Developer.

18. Annexure ‘J’ is copy of the letter issued by the Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices, Salt Lake Regional Office, Govt. of West Bengal duly signed by both the complainant and the representative of Dharitri Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. which discloses that the representative of the DIV Pvt. Ltd. attended the tripartite meeting and the said meeting was postponed and the next date of the meeting was fixed on 21/06/2019.

19. Annexure ‘K’ is copy of another letter dated 21/06/2019 issued by the Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices, Govt. of West Bengal and duly signed by the complainant and the representative of the opposite parties which discloses that the authorised representative Mr. Debayan Chakraborty informed the Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices, Salt Lake Regional Office, Govt. of West Bengal that an amount of Rs.3,40,000/- invested by the complainant would be refunded in full by DIP Ltd. in 8 (eight) equal instalments @ Rs.40,000/- each.

20. Annexure ‘L’ is copy of the letter dated 09/07/2019 issued by the Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices, Govt. of West Bengal which discloses that the DIP Ltd. did not refund any amount as per the resolution taken in the tripartite meeting which was held on 21/06/2019. From the evidence of the PWI and the documents as mentioned above I am of the view that the complainant has been able to prove his case. As such, the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for.

21. All the points are thus decided and disposed of in favour of the complainant and against the opposite parties.

22. The complaint case succeeds. In the result, the complaint case be and the same is allowed ex parte against the opposite parties. The opposite parties are hereby directed to refund the money of Rs.3,40,000/- to the complainant along with compensation in the form of interest @ 9% per annum with effect from the payment till the date on which the entire amount along with compensation is paid in the form of compensation. The opposite parties shall pay Rs.25,000/- as litigation cost.

23. The payment in terms of this order shall be made within two months from this date. If the opposite parties fail to comply with the direction made above within the time period mentioned above, then the complainant is at liberty to get the order implemented with due course of law.

24. Let a copy of this judgment be given to the complainant free of cost and a copy also be served upon all the opposite parties by Regd. post / Speed post with A/D as early as possible.