Sri Nityasundar Trivedi, Member
This complaint case being No.CC/81/2019 arising out of an application u/s.12 of C. P. Act, 1986 against four (4) O.Ps, praying for a direction of this Hon’ble State Commission upon the O.Ps to either execute registration of Deed of Conveyance and handing over the vacant possession of an agreed flat with completion certificate of the concerned Authority, or to refund the entire deposited amount of Rs.1,09,000/- and to reimburse Rs.4,07,500/- (in total Rs.5,16,500/-) in addition to an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.5 Lac and litigation cost amounting Rs.5 Lac (such other reliefs the Hon’ble State Commission may deem fit and proper for the ends of justice).
In depth scrutiny of this case shows the genesis of the dispute arose after alleged violation of the agreement dated 01-11-2015, executed between the two parties. First party of the agreement was the two (2) owners of 6 Cottah, 9 Chittak & 35 sq.ft. Bastu land and tenant of one two storied and partly one storied R. T. Structure in the holding number 56 & 58, Matrumal Lohia Lane, P.O-Salkia, P.S - M.P.Ghora, Dist - Howrah, Pin - 711106.
This land was subsequently registered with two registered Deed of Conveyances, which were registered in the office of A.D.S.R, Howrah and recorded as Book No.1, CD Volume No.10 (Pages from 691 to 731) being No.04692 and Book No.1 CD Volume No.13 (Pages 3009 to 3041) being No.06475.
The parties to the agreement decided to develop the land by demolishing the old dilapidated building and construction of multistoried building thereon, to sell the flats on the land to intending purchaser/purchasers on ownership basis, for which as per agreement the tenants were required to vacate their tenanted occupancy first.
The content of the agreement also transpired the Complainants of this case would get accommodation of 400 sq. ft. in the newly constructed multistoried building (with 320 sq. ft. carpet area and 80 sq. ft. super built up area).
It was also agreed upon that Complainant/tenants would get 320 sq. ft. carpet area flat @ Rs.600/- per sq. ft. (i.e. at Rs.1,92,000/-) and beyond that paying @ Rs.2200/- for 400 sq. ft. super built up area flat (320 sq. ft. carpet area flat) at Rs.8,80,000/- which means, in total on payment of Rs.10,72,000/-, the Complainants of this case will get flat measuring (400+400), 800 sq. ft. including 20% super built up area, in the First Floor of the newly multistoried building. Specification of walls, floor, doors, windows, kitchen, bathroom, water and electricity supply provision was also agreed upon between the parties.
This consideration money of Rs.10,72,000/- (Rupees Ten Lac seventy two thousand only) was agreed upon to be paid in seven installments of varying amount. Formula of bearing cost of shifting to new temporary area to enable demolition of the dilapidated building and formula of bearing rent of newly fixed accommodation of the tenant bearing the room to facilitate construction of the new building was also codified in the agreement. Completion of the project was fixed to be by December, 2017. The agreement also content a Clause that 100% of transportation cost to new residence on rent would be paid by the O.P Developer and 50% of the rent of new room will also be borne by the O.P Developer (50% will be borne by the tenant).
The Complainant/tenants on 19.12.2018 sent Ld. Advocate’s letter to all the four O.Ps of this case seeking redressal for not getting the dreamt flat, in spite of paying Rs.1,09,500/- and in spite of incurring Rs.4,07,500/- (Rupees Four Lac seven thousand five hundred only) as their rent burden of new residence.
It was alleged the lackadaisical attitude of the developers (O.Ps of this case) was the main reason of the Complainants not getting the flats, which were supposed to be obtained by 31.12.2017, as per agreement.
This venture of the Complainants/tenants went in vain. Then finding no alternative, the two Complainants/tenants filed CC/81/2019 on 01.02.2019 at this Hon’ble State Commission against the four developers (four O.Ps of this case).
This complaint case was provisionally admitted and notices were served upon the four (4) O.Ps for appearance to know their stand/version, in defence.
None appeared on the date fixed and also on subsequent dates, so much so, paper publication method had to be resorted to, as per rules.
Steps to have written version from the O.Ps also proved futile as the O.Ps did not care to attend this Hon’ble Commission for which there was no option left before this Hon’ble State Commission but to proceed ex-parte.
The prayer of the two Complainants were
- Refund of Rs.1,09,000/- paid as consideration money
- Reimbursement of Rs.4,07,500/-(cost of 50% of rent of the newly arranged rooms which had to be availed to for their temporary stay), since November, 2015 so that their occupied rooms could be vacated for demolition and new construction following the demolition (this rent amount/ and maintenance charges with the passage of time increased to Rs.7,22,500/- by the time of submission of BNA in October, 2023, being 50% of the rent element), taken with security deposit of Rs.1,30,000/- required to be paid by the Complainants to get rooms on rent.
- Compensation cost of Rs.5,00,000/-
- Litigation cost of Rs.5,00,000/-
- Such other relief this Hon’ble State Commission would allow.
The submissions of the Complainants/Tenants were heard at length and in full with necessary queries to reach the truth to the extent possible. But for non-appearance of the O.Ps at this Commission and in absence of filing of any written version to counter/contradict the Complaint leveled against them, there was no option left before this Hon’ble Commission to accept the unchallenged testimony of the Complainant side, submitted before this Commission on affidavit/affirmation, so far as quantum of rent, maintenance charges and amount of security deposit were concerned.
The BNA was also scrutinized with necessary queries to get the truth. Ultimately, we are of the considered opinion to allow this complaint, albeit in part. We hold and firmly hold the amount of Rs.1,0,9000/- deposited in the year 2015 need be refunded with an interest of 9% from the date of deposit till its realisation.
The incurred expenditure of Rs.7,22,500/- towards payment of security deposit, rent of the room and maintenance charges of rooms also need be paid. It was seen at the time of filing this case, this component was Rs.4,07,500/- but with the passage of time it rose up to Rs.7,22,500/-. But reckonable amount of reimbursement is adjudged to be Rs.7,22,500/- – Rs.1,30,000/- (Rs.5,92,500/-) since security deposit of Rs.1,30,000/- is likely to be got back at the time of leaving of the rented accommodation.
In consideration of contained in the forgoing paragraphs, we hold and firmly hold there was definitely deficiency of service and unfair trade practice in this case as manifested in violation of agreed burdening of the rent of the new accommodation. So we are of concrete opinion that the Complainants are entitled to get compensation to the extent detailed herein before.
Resultantly, it is hereby,
O R D E R E D
The four O.Ps shall refund the amount of Rs.1,09,000/- (Rupees One Lac nine thousand only) within one month of this date of Order to the two Complainants in equal share. The O.Ps shall also pay Rs.5,92,500/- (Rupees Five Lac ninety two thousand & five hundred only) within 30 days from the date of this Order. Non-payment of this amount within the stipulated period shall carry an interest @ 9% from November, 2015 and date of this Order respectively.
The O.P shall also pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) as compensation and Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as litigation cost. The Complainants shall have right to put this Order into execution in case of non-compliance of this Order by the O.P.
Let free copy of this Judgment be handed over to the Complainants and also to the four (4) O.Ps.
Thus, the complaint case stands disposed of.
Note accordingly.
