Date of Filing : 24/06/2022

Date of Judgement : 03/01/2024 

Sri Sudip Niyogi, Hon’ble President

                                                               Brief Facts

On 9/11/2011, complainants had entered into a registered agreement for sale with OP 13 who was the developer to buy the scheduled flat as noted in the petition of complaint from the developer’s allocation, at a consideration of Rs.14 lakh.  Prior to that, said developer-OP 13 had entered into a development agreement in respect of the property of the owner Atul Chandra Das since deceased, who was the predecessor in interest of OP 1 to 12.  Complainants paid the entire amount of consideration to OP 13 who delivered the possession of the said flat after completion of it to them.  But the deed of conveyance was not executed and registered in their favour.  According to them, they repeatedly requested the OPs and finally one letter was issued through their Advocate.  As no steps were taken on behalf of the OPs for the deed of execution in their favour, they filed the instant petition of complaint before this commission seeking several reliefs, including the one for execution and registration of a deed of conveyance.

OPs did not appear to contest the case.  So, it was heard exparte. 

Now, the point for consideration is whether the complainants are entitled to any relief(s) in this case.

                                                             FINDINGS

On the prayer of the complainants, the petition of complaint was treated as evidence on their part.  This apart, they produced copies of several documents namely – the agreement for sale, development agreement, lawyer’s letters exchanged between the complainants and OP 13 etc.

On going through the materials on record, it is found that, in reply to a letter of the complainants, OP 13 who was the developer and with whom the agreement for sale was executed by the complainants admitted that he had received the entire amount of consideration from the complainants and he also issued a possession letter to them in respect of the scheduled flat.  It is also found that original land owner Sri Atul Chandra Das expired on 29/9/2013. 

So, considering all the materials on record, it is found that an order is required to be made for the purpose of execution and registration of a deed of conveyance in favour of the complainants who claimed to be in possession of the said flat on payment of the consideration money.  They are also entitled to cost of litigation of Rs.5,000/-.

Accordingly, it is

                                                   ORDERED

That this case is allowed exparte against the OPs.

OPs are directed to execute and register a deed of conveyance in respect of the scheduled flat in accordance with the agreement for sale dt. 9/11/2011 in favour of the complainants within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.

OP 13 is also directed to pay cost of litigation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainants during the aforesaid period.

If the aforesaid order is not complied with, as directed, the complainants shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

Dictated and corrected by me

PRESIDENT