In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4^th Floor, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 217/2012.

1)                   Nafis Khan,

2)                   Raisa Banu,

            Both residing at Flat No.4B, 4^th Floor,

            Premises no.39,/1A, Mominpur Road,

            Kolkata-23, P.S. Ekbalpore.                                                                   ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   Sk. Naushad son of Abdul Hamid of

            M/s. Bharat Building Construction,

            10B, Bright Street, Kolkata-17  and

            19, Bright Street, Kolkata-17, P.S. Koreya.

2)       Pratap Sinha,

3)       Pravas Sinha,

4)       Deepak Sinha,

5)       Saroj Sinha,

6)       Monoj Sinha,

7)       Rina Devi,

8)       Rekha Yadav,

9)       Gayatri Prasad,

10)   Dinesh Sinha,

11)   Ashesh Sinha,

12)   Sanjeet Sinha,

13)   Asha Sinha,

All resideing at 23, Bondel Road,

P.S. Koraya, Kolkata-19.                                                           ---------- Opposite Parties

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.

                        Smt.  Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member

Order No.   13    Dated 18-07-2013.

          The case of the complainants in short is that complainant no.1 is the son of complainant no.2 and are joint owners of the flat in question and craves leave to file this complaint jointly as the cause of action is the same.

            O.p. no.1 is a developer and runs a housing construction business and sells the residential flats for generating income and profit. O.p. no.1 jointly with the landlords viz. o.p. no.2 to 13 developed the piece and parcel of land measuring about 5 kottahs, 2 chittaks more or less lying and situated at Municipal premises no.39/1A, Monimpore Road, P.S. Ekbalpur, Kolkata-23 with the purpose of selling the residential flats to intending purchasers for a consideration thereby rendering service within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

            Complainants being intending purchasers of a self contained residential flat entered into an agreement for sale with o.ps. and executed the agreement on 31.8.04.

            Complainants paid Rs.2,99,100/- and Rs.2,62,000/- to o.p. no.1 on 21.11.04 and on 31.8.04 which was duly received and acknowledged by receipts. Complainants thus paid Rs.1100/- extra from the consideration amount of Rs.5,60,000/- agreed upon in the agreement dt.31.8.04 for the flat no.4B, of West Side 4^th floor, measuring about 479 sq.ft. at premises no.39/1A, Monimpur Road, Kolkata-23, P.S. Ekbalpur.

            Complainants were handed over the possession of the flat upon completion and they have been residing there at present.

            O.ps. also did not hand over the completion certificate to the complainants. O.ps. are jointly and severally liable to provide service as per demands of law and have miserably failed to do so.

            A legal notice was sent dt.2.1.09, requesting the o.ps. to register the sale deed in favour of the complainants which was not heeded to. Verbal assurances kept the complainants in anticipation of necessary action on part of the o.ps. Another legal notice dt.20.3.12 was sent to o.ps. which was again not honoured. Hence the case was filed by the complainants with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.

            O.p. no.1  had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.p. no.1 in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. O.p. nos.2 to 13 did not contest the case by filing w/v and matter was heard ex parte against o.p. nos.2 to 13.

Decision with reasons:

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that Complainants being intending purchasers of a self contained residential flat entered into an agreement for sale with o.ps. and executed the agreement on 31.8.04.

            We further find that complainants paid Rs.2,99,100/- and Rs.2,62,000/- to o.p. no.1 on 21.11.04 and on 31.8.04 which was duly received and acknowledged by receipts. Complainants thus paid Rs.1100/- extra from the consideration amount of Rs.5,60,000/- agreed upon in the agreement dt.31.8.04 for the flat no.4B, of West Side 4^th floor, measuring about 479 sq.ft. at premises no.39/1A, Monimpur Road, Kolkata-23, P.S. Ekbalpur.

            It is seen from the record that o.p. no.1 contested the case by filing w/v, but o.p. nos.2 to 13 did not appear and contest the case despite receipt of notice and matter was heard ex parte as against o.p. nos.2 to 13. In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that o.ps. had sufficient deficiencies being service provider to their consumers / complainants and complainants are entitled to relief. Complainants have not pressed for compensation and litigation cost and has prayed for registration of the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the case is allowed on contest without cost against o.p. no.1 and ex parte without cost against o.p. nos.2 to 13. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants within thirty days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. complainants shall have the liberty to get the deed of conveyance registered through court by way of filing execution case.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.