DATE OF FILING : 14/02/2014.
DATE OF S/R : 19/03/2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 21/08/2014.
MR. KARUNA SINDHU CHAKRABORTY,
lt. Gobindra Lal Chakroborty,
32, Noor Mohammed Munshi Lane, P.O. Howrah,
Howrah 711 101.-------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
Smt. Minoti Banerjee
w/o Mr. Ashish Banerjee,
170/3/1, Belilious Road,
P.S. Bantra, P.O. Howrah,
Howrah 711 101. -------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. The instant case was filed by the complainant U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended upto date ) wherein the complainant has prayed for direction upon the O.P. to handover the schedule property in terms of agreement dated 11-01-2011 and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 2 lakhs together with litigation costs as the o.p. in spite of receiving Rs. 50,000/- through cheque no. 432433 dated 24-12-2010 from the complainant refused to accept the balance amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- and handed over the schedule property at 32/1, Noor Mahammad Munshi Lane, under Ward no. 19, Howrah Municipality Area.
2. The notice was served to the o.p. which is returned back with postal remark ‘intimation served’ and ‘unclaimed’ which is a good service as per Apex Court verdict. The o.p. neither appeared nor filed any written version. So the case was heard ex parte against o.p.
3. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.?
ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief and compensation as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
4. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. The agreement dated 11-01-2011 reveal that there was an agreement in between the parties for sale of schedule property for the said purpose the o.p. received Rs. 50,000/- through cheque bearing no. 432433 dated 24-12-2010 drawn in favour of U.B.I. Kadamtala Branch, Howrah, as part payment of the total consideration of Rs. 5 lakhs. In spite of repeated reminders the o.p. turned a deaf ear to the request of the complainant and in our considered opinion the denial on the part of o.p. amounts to gross deficiency in service. The o.p. cannot have any respite from the rigours of law as because the complaint is quite maintainable before the Forum in view of the Section 3 of the C.P. Act, 1986. Moreover, it is likely to be stated from the enclosures that the complainant failed to establish the amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- through A/c payee cheque sent through the speed post bearing no. 361562008 was encashed or not no transferrable record was furnished in support of cheque amount encashed including pass book by the complainant.
In view of unchallenged testimonies, it is palpable that the o.p. conduct suffers from gross deficiency in service. It is, therefore, a fit case to pass necessary order accordingly.
Both the points are accordingly disposed of.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 75 of 2014 ( HDF 75 of 2014 ) be and the same is allowed ex parte against the o.p. with costs.
The O.P. be directed to refund of Rs. 50,000/- with interest @ 9% w.e.f. 11-01-2011 ( date of agreement ) within 30 days from the date of this order i.d., it shall carry a further interest @ 9% p.a. on the whole amount till realization.
The O.P. be further directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for causing unnecessary harassment and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation costs to the complainant.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( P. K. Chatterjee )
Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
