DATE OF FILING                    :     12.08.2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      10.02.2015.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     19.06.2015.  

Sri Ritwik Banerjee,

son of Sri Sambhu Nath Banerjee,

resident of flat no. A/4 ( 4^th floor ),

17, Dr. A.N. Paul Lane, P.O. & P.S. Bally,

District Howrah. ……………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

Smt. Sudipa Gupta,

daughter of Sri Sunil  Kumar Gupta,

resident of flat no. 3 ( 3^rd floor ),

17, Dr. A.N. Paul Lane, P.O. & P.S. Bally,

District Howrah,

PIN  711201……..........………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTY.

                                                P    R    E     S    E    N     T

             Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

                               Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

            Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak,  L.l.b., ( Retired Railway Officer ).         

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. This is an application  U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioner, Sri Ritwik Banerjee, against the o.p., Smt. Sudipa Gupta, praying for a direction upon the o.p. to execute and register a deed of conveyance in favour of the petitioner and compensation of Rs. 1 lac for mental harassment and agony and litigation costs of Rs. 10,000/-.

2. The o.p. expressed her intention to sell the schedule mentioned garage space no. 4 measuring 154 sq. ft. in the ground floor of five storied building ‘Sagar Sangam’ at holding no. 17, Dr.  A.N. Paul Lane, P.O. & P.S. Bally, District Howrah, and the petitioner paid the entire consideration money of Rs. 90,000/- and also took possession of the garage but the o.p. did not execute and register the deed resulting filing of the case.

3. In spite of due service of notice the o.p. did not appear and thus the case is heard ex parte against her.

4.  The only point to be decided here is whether the petitioner is entitled to get the sale deed executed in his favour by the o.p. ?

5. DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

            In the instant case the petitioner filed affidavit in support of his case and also he filed documents which proved the fact that he paid the consideration money of Rs. 90,000/- and the o.p. received the same as could be noticed from the memo of receipt. But in spite of repeated requests the deed of conveyance was not executed and registered in his favour by the o.p. compelling the petitioner to file the case. The evidence produced by petitioner proved his case ex parte as all the evidences went unchallenged and nothing to disbelieve the case of the petitioner.      

6. The court fee paid is correct. 
7. In the result, the consumer case succeeds.

      Hence,

                       O     R     D      E      R      E        D

            That the C. C. Case No. 452 of 2014 ( HDF 452 of 2014 )  be  and the same is allowed ex parte with costs of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid by the o.p. to the petitioner and the o.p. is directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the schedule mentioned garage no. 4 within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order and also the o.p. is to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for making the petitioner suffer due to mental agony and harassment and to comply order within the above mentioned stipulated time i.d., the petitioner is at liberty to put the order into execution.     

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    B. D.  Nanda   )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F., Howrah.