Judgement dt.8-03-2017

            This is a complaint made by one Shri Siddhartha Dutta and Smt. Ruby Dutta against Shri Ashis Kumar Sarkar, OP No.1 Shri Tarak Ghosh, OP No.2 praying for a direction upon the OPs to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance of the property mentioned in the schedule and a direction to the OP to handover the original agreement and also to handover the completion certificate and to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant entered into an agreement for sale on 26/5/2010 cancelling the earlier agreement for selling flat on the south west portion of the third floor measuring 575 Sq. ft. super built up area for consideration of Rs.10,50,000/-. As per agreement Complainant paid full consideration money to OPs. After construction being completed OPs handed over the possession of the flat on 5/10/2014 to the Complainants and Complainants are in possession at present. In the meantime Complainants as per request of OPs handed over the original agreement to the OPs for mutation purpose.

            Complainant requested the OPs to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance verbally. But OPs did not take any heed to the request. On 10/8/2016 Complainant sent a legal notice through their Advocate for registration of the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Complainant but of no use.

            OP No.2 filed written version and denied all the allegations of the complaint. Further OP No.2 has stated that considering the full payment made by the Complainant he is willing to register the Deed of Conveyance and has prayed for direction upon the Complainant to deposit the draft deed.

Decision with reasons

            Complainant filed a petition for treating the complaint as affidavit-in-chief. On the basis of which the complaint was treated as affidavit-in-chief. OP No.1 did not appear in this case and so the case was heard ex-parte against OP No.1.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainants are entitled to prayer which they have made. On perusal of the prayer it appears that Complainants have prayed for registration of sale deed.

            OP No.2 by filing written version has admitted the contention of the Complainant and he is ready for making Deed of Conveyance. Further it appears from the copy of the agreement for sale that all the parties have signed it. Accordingly, we are of the view that there is no bar for making a direction upon the OPs to make the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Complainants.

            Complainants have prayed for compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-. On perusal of averment of complaint petition it is not clear as to why Complainant should be awarded compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and also litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-. So we do not find any circumstances to allow the compensation and litigation cost.

            Hence,

O R D E R E D

            CC/437/2016 and the same is allowed ex-parte against OP No.1 and on contest against OP No.2. OPs are directed to make Conveyance Deed in favour of the Complainant within six months of this order; in default the Conveyance Deed shall be made by this Forum.