West Bengal

Kolkata-II(Central)

CC/36/2019

Sanjit Singh alias Sanjeet Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sea View Impex Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Kanchan Gupta

15 Mar 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
KOLKATA UNIT - II (CENTRAL)
8-B, NELLIE SENGUPTA SARANI, 7TH FLOOR,
KOLKATA-700087.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/36/2019
( Date of Filing : 31 Jan 2019 )
 
1. Sanjit Singh alias Sanjeet Singh
22/1/H/8, KC Road, BB Bazar, P.O.Cossipore, P.S. Cossipore, Kolkata-700002.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Sea View Impex Pvt. Ltd.
119/2B, Harish Mukherjee Road, P.O.Kalighat, P.S. Bhawanipore, Kolkata-700026, Rep. by Tapash Kumar Bhagat.
2. Tapash Kumar Bhagat
119/2B, Harish Mukherjee Road, P.O.Kalighat, P.S. Bhawanipore, Kolkata-700026 and 58A, Rajani Mukherjee Road, P.O.Sahapur, P.S. New Alipore, Kolkata-700038.
3. The Directors, Sea View Impex Pvt. Ltd.
119/2B, Harish Mukherjee Road, P.O.Kalighat, P.S. Bhawanipore, Kolkata-700026.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Swapan Kumar Mahanty PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Sahana Ahmed Basu MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Ashoke Kumar Ganguly MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Kanchan Gupta, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 15 Mar 2021
Final Order / Judgement

FINAL ORDER/JUDGEMENT

               

 

SHRI SWAPAN KUMAR MAHANTY, PRESIDENT

 

The present consumer complainant has been filed u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by the complainant against the OPs for the inordinate delay in handing over possession of the flat booked by him in the project launched by the builder/OP1.

Complainant booked a 3BHK flat being No. “C” on the 3rd floor of the proposed building  measuring about 965 sq. ft. (super built up area) for a total consideration of Rs.16,40,500/-. An Agreement for Sale was executed between the parties on 21.08.2015. The construction of the building is to be completed within 24 months from the date of execution of the Agreement for Sale. Complainant has made payment of Rs. 11,01,200/- out of total consideration. OPs did not provide possession of the subject flat within the stipulated period. Alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant filed the present complainant.

OPs 1&2 have contested the case by filing written version contending inter alia that they have registered two flats and two shops in the name of Amarjeet Singh, Usha Singh, Raj Singh and Rishav Singh as consideration money was advanced by them. Family members of the complainant are in possession of those flats complainant never paid any consideration amount as per agreement dated 21.08.2015 to the answering OPs. Consideration money is the main essence of the agreement and no payment is made in respect of the agreement as alleged. As such, the agreement dated 21.08.2015 is void in the eye of law. The answering OPs have no responsibility to execute and register sale Deed and handover possession of the flat to the complainant. Thus, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

OP3 is duly served of the complaint. However, despite service of notice upon them, no written version is filed.

Complainant and answering OPs have filed their evidences by way of affidavit supporting their respective cases. Heard the Learned Advocate for both parties and also perused the record.

Complainant has proved that the OPs have entered into an Agreement for Sale dated 21.08.2015 in respect of the subject flat and OPs are supposed to handover the flat to the complainant within 24 months from the date of execution of the agreement but despite the expiry of the said period the possession of the flat is not handover to the complainant. Complainant has stated that he has paid Rs. 11,01,200/- to the OPs out of total consideration amount of Rs. 16,40,500/-. OPs did not challenge the authentic of the Agreement for Sale dated 21.08.2015 and/or file any application for appointment of handwriting expert to prove that signature appearing in the agreement for Sale is forged. Since the complainant has clearly stated that the OPs have failed to handover possession of the subject flat within the stipulated period, the OPs have committed deficiency in service. Thus, the OPs cannot waive their liabilities. The OPs fail to fulfill their commitment. Therefore, we have no hesitation in concluding that the OPs have committed deficiency in service as also have indulged in unfair trade practice.

In view of the discussion above, the complaint is allowed with following directions:-

  1. OPs are directed to handover possession of the subject flat to the complainant within 30 days from today after receiving balance consideration amount.
  2. OPs are directed to execute and register, Deed of Conveyance of the subject flat in favour of the complainant within 15 days from the date of handover possession and receiving balance consideration amount.
  3. Alternatively, the OPs are directed to refund Rs. 11,01,200/- to the complainant within 60 days from today along with compensation of simple interest  at the rate of 6 percent per annum from the date of payments till realization of the amount.
  4. OPs are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation to the complainant.

With these directions the present consumer complaint stands disposed of.

Copy of the judgment be given to the parties as per rules.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Swapan Kumar Mahanty]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Sahana Ahmed Basu]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Ashoke Kumar Ganguly]
MEMBER
 

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.