The case of the complainant in a nutshell is that she was a tenant in the ground floor premises no.22 of Hari Ghosh Street, Police - Station Burtolla, Kolkata – 700 006. The owners of the said premises decided to develop the property with the help of a developer by constructing a new building thereon. So, the complainant with an intent to purchase her tenanted portion after new construction, entered into an agreement for sale dated 23.12.2017 with the opposite party nos. 1 to 3 the developers herein and opposite party nos. 4 to 9 the owners of the said premises, one self contained flat measuring about 202 sq. ft. covered area in the ground floor South West corner of the new constructed building at premises no.22, Hari Ghosh Street, Police - Station Burtolla, Kolkata – 700 006 at total consideration of Rs.4,04,000/- (Rupees four lakh four thousand) only. Accordingly, as per terms and conditions of the agreement dated 23.12.2017, the opposite parties on receiving the full consideration amount on 15.01.2018 handed over peaceful vacant possession of the scheduled flat and issued a possession certificate in favour of the complainant. Since then the complainant is in possession of the said flat and paying tax to the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.
According to the complainant, in spite of repeated requests the opposite parties are not taking any steps for registration of the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the flat in her favour. Finding no other alternative the complainant sent a notice dated 24.09.2019 through her advocate along with draft deed of conveyance for causing registration on accepting rest consideration amount of Rs.4000/-(Rupees four thousand) only but to no effect. Such act of the opposite parties is clearly deficiency in service. Hence this case.
It appears from the record that notices have been served upon all the opposite parties. The opposite party nos. 1 to 4 and 9 appeared in the case. Opposite party nos. 1 to 3 filed written version but none of the opposite parties further contested the case and ultimately the case was heard ex-parte against all of them. It appears from the record that the opposite party nos. 1 to 3 by filing written version stated that the purchased flat of the complainant is situated under the owners allocated portion in the building as per development agreement. As such being developers they have no obligation to execute any deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant in respect of the flat in question. According to them opposite party nos. 5 to 8 are under obligation to registrar the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant. Opposite party no.4 appeared but not filed any written version and the case was fixed exparte against her as she did not take any steps in the case. Notices were served upon rest opposite parties but they did not appear in the case.
The complainant filed affidavit in chief and original documents to prove her case. The agreement for sale is marked Ext.-1, the possession certificate is marked Ext.-2, the notice dated 24.09.2019 is marked Ext.-3 and 7 (seven) postal receipts are marked Ext.-3/1 to Ext.-3/7 respectively.
It appears from the record that the complainant has proved her case by her unchallenged and un-rebutted evidence in the form of affidavit in chief and documents Ext.-1, and Ext.-2. Ext.-1 reveals that the complainant entered into an agreement for sale dated 23.12.2017 with the developers, landowners and erstwhile tenant (confirming party) to purchase the flat mentioned in the schedule of the complaint application at a consideration of Rs.4,04,000/- (Rupees four lakhs four thousand) only. Ext.-2 reveals that on payment of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs) only by the complainant, the developers, on 15.01.2018, handed over the possession of the flat mentioned in the schedule of the complaint application situated in the owner’s allocation in favour of the complainant. Ext.-3 letter dated 24.09.2019 sent upon the opposite parties by the complainant through her advocate reveals that the complainant demanded registration of the deed of conveyance on remaining payment of rest consideration amount of Rs.4,000/- (Rupees four thousand) only from the complainant. Ext.-3/1 to Ext.-3/8 reveals that notice was sent to all opposite parties via postal department.
It is crystal clear that the complainant is a consumer in this case in terms of section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The opposite parties nos. 4 to 8 are duty bound to register the deed of conveyance wherein the opposite party nos. 1 to 3 are required to execute the same as confirming party. The opposiet parties have defaulted in providing proper service to the complainant as they have not executed the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant.
Therefore, the complaint case succeeds.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the complaint case be and the same is allowed ex-parte against all the opposite parties with cost.
The opposite party nos. 4 to 8 are directed to execute the Deed of Conveyance as land owners and opposite party nos. 1 to 3 as confirming parties in respect of the flat mentioned in the schedule of the complaint application in favour of the complainant within 45 days from the date hereof in default the complainant shall be at liberty to get the Deed of Conveyance registered through this Commission.
The opposite party nos. 4 to 8 either jointly or severally shall pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only as compensation for harassment to the complainant within 30 days from the date hereof failing which they shall be liable to pay simple interest @ 9% per annum on the said amount till the date of actual payment.
The opposite party nos. 4 to 8 either jointly or severally shall pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) only as compensation and litigation cost to the complainant within 30 days from the date hereof failing which they shall be liable to pay simple interest @ 9% per annum on the said amount till the date of actual payment.
Disctated & corrected by me
President
