Judgment : Dt.21.8.2017
Shri S. K. Verma, President.
This is a complaint made by Sri Sanjoy Biswas, son of Gopal Biswas, residing at Haridaspur, P.S.- Banga, P.O.- Khalitpur, Dist.-North 24-Parganas against – (1) Smt. Mina Das (Developer), wife of Sri Badal Chandra Das, OP No.1, (2)(a) Sri Suddhangshu Nag, son of Late Surendra Chandra Nag, OP No.2, (2)(b) Sri Hmangshu Nag, son of Late Surendra Chandra Nag, OP No.3 and (2)(c) Sri Asit Nag, son of Late Surendra Chandra Nag, all of 2-14, Chittaranjan Colony, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 092, praying for direction upon the OP to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in respect of 2nd schedule shop room within a specific period in favour of the Complainant and compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-, for stamp duty Rs.80,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.
Facts in brief are that one Suniti Prova Nag was absolute owner in respect of property mentioned in the first schedule. Said Suniti Prova Nag entered into development agreement of 14.3.2000 with one Mina Das wife of Shri Badal Chandra Das and developer completed the building including the ground floor. Complainant for his personal need and to lead his livelihood and maintaining family purchased a shop room measuring 187 sq.ft. Complainant paid total consideration of Rs.3,00,000/- Developer failed and neglected to handover the shoproom during the lifetime of Suniti Probha Nag who died in 18.5.2008 leaving behind her sons namely Suddhangshu Nag, Hmangshu Nag and Asit Nag who have in possession of scheduled premises. They claim that they are owners of the shoproom measuring about 187 sq.ft. Complainant on several occasions requested the OPs to handover the possession and now Complainant is in possession. Complainant requested the OPs to execute the Conveyance Deed but of no use. So, Complainant files this case.
OPs did not contest the case by filing written version despite receipt of notice upon them.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed a petition praying for treating the complaint as affidavit-in-chief and the prayer was allowed.
Main point of determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs.
Complainant has filed Xerox copy of joint venture agreement which reveals that it was entered into between one Mina Das, Smt. Suniti Probha Nag and sons of Suniti Probha Nag. As per the Complainant’s contention this is the document on the basis of which building was constructed on the land of Suniti Probha Nag. Another Xerox copy of agreement for sale is filed which is in between Smt. Suniti Probha Nag and the Complainant for sale and purchase of a shop room. So, it appears that this agreement for sale is between two individuals for purchasing a shop room and selling that by the other. Such agreement is covered with Specific Relief Act and not governed by C.P.Act. Moreover, it appears that this agreement was entered sometime in 2003. Hence, we are of the view that Civil Court has jurisdiction on such disputes and not in Consumer Forums. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in this complaint.
Hence,
ordered
CC/119/2017 and the same dismissed ex-parte.
