| Miscellaneous Application No. MA/1/2024 | | ( Date of Filing : 02 Jan 2024 ) | | In | | Complaint Case No. CC/42/2023 |
| | | | 1. Sri Ashim Kumar Sengupta | | S/o Late Jatindra Kumar Sengupta, 1B, Santrapara Lane, P.O. & P.S. - Sinthee, Kolkata - 700050. And At 26/2A, Raja Bagan Lane, P.O. - Ghughudanga, P.S. - Sinthee, Kolkata - 700030. |
| ...........Appellant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. Sri Abhra Bose | | S/o Late Swaraj Kumar Bose, J.F.- 274, Ittima Neela Apartment, E-City, Phase - II, Bangalore - 560100. And At 37, Nandalal Basu Sarani College, P.O. & P.S. - Siliguri, District - Darjeeling, Pin - 734001. | | 2. Sri Aloke Bose | | S/o Late Santosh Kumar Bose, 1A, Santrapara Lane, P.O. & P.S. - Sinthee, Kolkata - 700050. | | 3. Sri Pradip Kumar Bose | | S/O Late Santosh Kumar Bose, 1A, Santrapara Lane, P.O. & P.S. - Sinthee, Kolkata - 700050. | | 4. Sri Prabir Kumar Bose | | S/O Late Santosh Kumar Bose, 1A, Santrapara Lane, P.O. & P.S. - Sinthee, Kolkata - 700050. | | 5. Sri Jaydev Bose | | S/o Late Santosh Kumar Bose, 1A, Santrapara Lane, P.O. & P.S. - Sinthee, Kolkata - 700050. | | 6. Sri Krishnendu Bose | | S/o Late Santosh Kumar Bose, 1A, Santrapara Lane, P.O. & P.S. - Sinthee, Kolkata - 700050. | | 7. Sri Anirban Sengupta | | S/o Late Dipak Sengupta, 11A, Roypara Road, P.O. & P.S. - Sinthee, Kolkata - 700050. |
| ...........Respondent(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | Order No. 2 Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present. Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.7/petitioner is present. Ld. Advocate for the opposite party nos.2 to 6 is present. The Misc. Application dated 02.01.2024 filed by the opposite party no.7/petitioner is taken up for hearing. Perused. Considered. Heard Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.7/petitioner and Ld. Advocate for the complainant. Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.7/petitioner submits that the complainant entered into an agreement for sale with opposite party nos.1 to 6 who are the land owners of the suit premises and opposite party no.7/petitioner is the developer herein. The complainant has booked a flat to purchase from the owners allocation as per agreement for sale, as such opposite party no.7/petitioner has no liability to discharge handover of the complainant in this case. He is neither necessary party nor proper party to this case. Therefore, the name of opposite party no.7 be deleted from the cause title of CC/42/2023. In reply Ld. Advocate for the complainant raised strong objection against the prayer of opposite party no.7/petitioner. Ld. Advocate for the complainant submits that opposite party no.7 is a necessary party to this case. Being developer of the suit premises, opposite party no.7 is liable to provide completion certificate of the building. Therefore he is necessary party to this case. On perusal of the material of the record we find that the complainant filed this case against the opposite parties for delivery of vacant possession of the flat mentioned in the ‘B’ schedule, Registration of the Deed of Conveyance upon receiving balance consideration money along with direction to handover the completion certificate of the building and on other reliefs. Therefore the opposite party no.7/petitioner being developer of the suit premises is a necessary party to this case. Considering the discussion made above, the prayer of opposite party no.7/petitioner is liable to be rejected. Hence, it is O R D E R E D that the Misc. Application dated 02.01.2024 is dismissed on contest with cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) only. | |
