This is a complaint made by one Usha Das, wife of Subir Das, resident of 14, New Santoshpur Main Road, P.S.- Purba Jadavpur, Kolkata-75 against (1) Smt. Sabita Ghosh, wife of Sri Haradhan Chandra Ghosh, resident of 1/126 Gariahat Road (South), P.S.-Lake, Kolkata-68, OP No.1, (2) Anjan Kumar Nag, son of Late Birendranath Nag, resident of 2/89, Bijoygarh, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-32, OP No.2 and (3) Mithu Majumder, wife of Subhas Majumder, resident of 71, Ananda Pally, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata – 32, OP No.3, praying for direction upon the OP to execute a deed of sale in favour of the Complainant as per agreement dated 11.5.2008 and for compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for deficiency of services and litigation cost.
Facts in brief are that Complainant entered into an agreement with the OP on 11.5.2008 to purchase a car parking space measuring about 120 sq.ft. on the ;ground floor of the premises being No.456/1, New Santoshpur Main Road, P.S.- Purba Jadavpur, Kolkata-68. As per the terms the Complainant paid Rs.60,000/- out of total consideration of money of Rs.1,00,000/-. OP, after receiving the money did not register the deed in favour of the Complainant despite several requests made by the Complainant. As OP did not make the registration deed Complainant sent a notice through his Advocate for making registration, but, of no use. So, Complainant files this case.
OP filed written objection denying all the allegations of the complaint. They have denied that due to their latches registration of car parking could not be made. Further, they have admitted that on 11.5.2008 an agreement was entered into between OP for sale of one car parking space measuring 120 sq.ft. on the ground floor on a consideration of Rs.1,00,000/-. They have further admitted that they received Rs.60,000/-. But, despite several requests, Complainant did not pay Rs.40,000/- to the OP and so deed of conveyance could not be made. They have alleged that due to latches of the Complainant in paying the rest of the money this delay was caused and they are at fault.
Decision with reasons:
Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief stating the facts which she has mentioned in the complaint. Further, OPs have filed questionnaire to which Complainant has replied. Similarly, OPs have filed evidence on affidavit, stating the facts that is mentioned in the written version and they have submitted that due to the latches of the Complainant the deed of registration could not be made against which Complainant have put certain questionnaire to which OPs have filed affidavit-in-reply.
Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the prayers which he has made.
First prayer of the Complainant is for registration of the car parking space as per agreement for sale on 11.5.2008. In this regard, it is the contention of the OP that the delay was caused by the Complainant and at this stage they are not in a position to make the registration. OPs have admitted that they received Rs.60,000/-. So, there is no dispute over the agreement for sale and receipt for Rs.60,000/- by the OP. Complainant has not prayed for refund of Rs.60,000/-, in default making of registration deed. Complainant has only prayed for execution of registration deed.
After considering the facts of both the sides and evidence as laid, it is clear that latches are on both the sides and in the circumstances to pass resolution can only be a direction upon the OP to refund Rs.60,000/- with interest @ 10% from the date of filing of this complaint and also compensation of Rs.10,000/- with litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-.
Hence,
ordered
CC/215/2016 and the same is allowed in part. OPs are directed to refund Rs.60,000/- to the Complainant with 10% interest from the date of filing of this case, within two months of this order. They are also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost within this period, in default this amount will also carry interest @ 10% till realization.
