Date of filing : 27.03.2017

Date of Judgment : Dt.11.01.2021

Mrs. Sashi Kala Basu, Hon’ble President

            This petition of complaint is filed under section 12 of C.P.Act, 1986 by Shubhodeep Bhadra alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties (referred as OP hereinafter) namely (1) Shribhumi Realty Pvt. Ltd., (2) Mr. Gopal Malakar, (3) Mr. Biswabrata Maity and (4) Mr. Sagar Ganguly.

            Case of the Complainant, in short, is that the OP No.1 is a real estate company which performs buying, selling and renting and operating of self-owned or leased real estate. OP No.2 to 4 are the Directors and/or the former Directors of the OP No.1 and have utilized the funds of company at different point of time, to their benefits. On seeing the wide publication through internet advertisement, Complainant got in touch with a representative of the OP No.1 for purchasing one flat under MIG Category in the project (Shribhumi) and booked the same on payment of sum of Rs.1,25,000/- by way of  two cheques, dt.31.7.2012 and 03.09.2012, in favour of the Shribhumi Realty Pvt. Ltd. On payment of Rs.1,25,000/-, towards confirmation, a money receipt being No.1489 dt.25.07.2012 was issued by the OP No.1. It was assured that the said flat would be completed and handed over to Complainant in the beginning of the year 2016 and further assured that after obtaining sanction plan, Complainant would be called upon for execution of the agreement for sale in respect of the said flat. But, till date the project has not been completed and the project site is completely vacant. Thereafter, OP in order to return the amount paid by the Complainant, issued one cheque for a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- dt.07.11.2013 but on its presentation, said cheque was dishonoured due to “fund insufficient”. So, ultimately Complainant by a letter dt.26.11.2016 through his Ld. Advocate, addressed to the OP No.1 asked for refund of the money. But, in spite of giving notice, OPs did not refund the amount to the Complainant. OPs have resorted to unfair trade practice. So, the present complaint has been filed praying to direct the OPs to jointly and severely return Rs.1,25,000/- along with interest @ 10%, to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for causing mental harassment and agony and Rs.20,000/- towards litigation cost and other incidental charges.

            Complainant has filed receipt showing payment of Rs.1,25,000/-, and the copy of the notice sent through Ld. Advocate asking for the refund of amount of Rs.1,25,000/- along with interest as well as the cheque issued by the OP and the return cheque slip issued by the Bank.

            On perusal of the record, it appears that OP No.5 namely Shri Samit Dutta was only contesting the case but vide order dt.12.04.2019 in RP/300/2017, Hon’ble State Commission striked off the name of said Samit Dutta. Other OPs did not take any step and so the case proceeded ex-parte against them.

            So, the only point require determination is whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

            Decision with reasons

Admittedly, no agreement was executed by and between the parties. In order to substantiate his claim that he had booked a flat under MIG Category in the said project of Shribhumi and paid Rs.1,25,000/-, Complainant has filed receipt  being No.1489 issued by the OP No.1 dt.07.08.2012 which substantiate the claim of the Complainant that he had booked the flat by way of payment of said sum through two cheques dt.31.7.2012 and 03.09.2012 respectively. Complainant has also filed the original cheque dt.7.11.2013 issued on behalf of OP No.1 for sum of Rs.1,30,000/- but it is evident from Bank slip that it was returned with remarks ‘funds insufficient’. So, these documents sufficiently establish the case of the Complainant that he has neither been handed over the flat nor been refunded the money. The claim of the Complainant is also established as there is absolutely no contrary material before this commission to counter or rebut the claim of the Complainant.

            So, as the Complainant has neither been handed over the flat nor has been refunded the amount, in view of the discussions as highlighted above, OP No.1 to 4 are jointly and severely liable to pay the said booking amount of Rs.1,25,000/- along with interest in the form of compensation and also the litigation cost.

            These points are answered accordingly.

            Hence

                             ordered

            CC/186/2017 is allowed ex-parte against OP No.1 to 4. OP No.1 to 4 are jointly and severely directed to refund Rs.1,25,000/- to the Complainant along with interest on the said sum @ 10% p.a. from the date of payment to till this date, within two months from the date of this order. The OPs are further directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.12,000/- within the aforesaid period of two months, in default the entire sum shall carry interest @ 10%  till realization.