West Bengal

StateCommission

A/111/2024

RANJAN DAS - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAI GROUP OF CONSTRUCTION REPRESENTED BY PREM ROUTH - Opp.Party(s)

PRASHANTA THAKUR

30 May 2024

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087
 
First Appeal No. A/111/2024
( Date of Filing : 20 Apr 2024 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/46/2024 of District Howrah)
 
1. RANJAN DAS
241, G.T. ROAD, P.S- SHIBPUR, DISTRICT- HOWRAH & PIN- 711102
HOWRAH
WEST BENGAL
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SAI GROUP OF CONSTRUCTION REPRESENTED BY PREM ROUTH
96, COWIES GHAT ROAD, P.O & P.S- SHIBPUR, DISTRICT- HOWRAH & PIN- 711102
HOWRAH
WEST BENGAL
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL PRESIDENT
 
PRESENT:PRASHANTA THAKUR, Advocate for the Appellant 1
 
None appears
......for the Respondent
Dated : 30 May 2024
Final Order / Judgement

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL, PRESIDENT

  1. This appeal has been filed under section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 challenging the order No. 2 dated 20.03.2024 passed by the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Howrah (in short, ‘the District Commission’) in connection with consumer case No. CC/46/2024.
  1. The appellant being the complainant filed a complaint case praying for the following reliefs :-

“a) To allow and admit this case as per above submission with all relevant documentary annexures hereby attached with this main complaint;

b) To allow a Total Claimed amount of Rs.10,92,500/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Ninety Two Thousand Five Hundred) only as per market value of total area measuring of 455 sq. ft. with super built up area as per particulars of Owner’s allocation referred & discussed at Second Schedule mentioned by Developer / Opposite Party at Registered Deed of Developer Agreement along with Power of Attorney annexed as Annexure ‘P1’;

c) To allow compensation meaning of Commission has power to award compensation not only for loss or damage suffered but also for injustice, harassment and agony suffered by consumer. The word “Compensation” has very wide connotation held in “briefly interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in vital case as follows;

I) Lucknow Development Authority Vs M.K. Gupta on 5th November, 1993

Equivalent Citation: 1994 AIR 787, 1994 SCC(1) 243, hereby annexed as Annexure “P2”

d) To allow Litigation Cost with other reliefs as your Hon’ble Forum deem fit & proper for the Justice, Equity & Good Concise.”

3. After filing the above noted complaint case, the case was fixed for hearing on the point of admission on 20.03.2024.

4. The Learned District Commission was pleased to dismiss the complaint case by the order impugned.

5. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order the appellant / complainant has filed the present appeal.

6. Heard the Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant. Perused the record.

7. Having heard the Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and on careful perusal of the record, the grounds of memo of appeal and other documents, it appears to me that to prove the case, the complainant filed a registered deed of development agreement executed between the parties dated 01.05.2021 along with the petition of complaint.

8. Clause VIII Completion of the Building stipulates that the proposed building shall have to be completed within 30 (Thirty) months from the date of Bhumi Puja but in case, any unforeseen circumstances arise during this period preventing the Developer of the other part to complete the constructional project within the aforesaid period, then, the time will be extended for completing the same. Therefore, it is clear that the opposite parties had given undertaking of delivery of the said flat within 30 (Thirty) months from the date of Bhumi Puja. The appellant / complainant has not filed any document in support of his case to prove that the said Bhumi Puja has already been performed.

9. In this facts and circumstances, I find that it is a premature completion as the appellant / complainant has failed to prove that Bhumi Puja has been performed in respect of the case flat.

10. Therefore, I am of the view that the cause of action for the complainant does not arise at this stage. As such, I hold that there is no ground to admit this consumer complaint at this stage.

11. Under this facts and circumstances, I hold that the Learned District Commission has properly considered the facts and circumstances of the case and finally arrived at the conclusion and passed the order which, according to me, calls for no interference by this Commission. As such, this is liable to be affirmed and the appeal is also liable to be dismissed.

12. In the result, the order No. 2 dated 20.03.2024 passed by the Learned District Commission, Howrah in connection with the consumer case No. CC/46/2024 is hereby confirmed.

13. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

14. Let a copy of this order be sent down to the Learned District Commission at once.

15. Office to comply.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL]
PRESIDENT
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.