Order no.   1                                                                                 Date : 23.08.2021.

Petition of complaint is filed by            SRI VIKASH KUMAR SHUKLA,     against     Sri Dilip Bhattacharya,           under Section 35 of the C. P. Act, 2019 along with Demand Draft being no.318072 dated 21/08/2021 amounting to Rs.1000/- drawn on  State Bank of India, Howrah.

        Let it be registered as complaint case no. CC/169/2021.

        Fee paid by complainant is correct. 

        Today is fixed for admission hearing.

   Lady Member                                             President

Later

Today the instant case is fixed for admission hearing.

Ld. Adv. for the complainant is present. The case is taken up for admission hearing.

Hd. the Ld. Adv. for the complainant on the point of admissibility.

It appears from the complaint petition and copy of documents annexed herewith that the complainant has booked the schedule mentioned Flat from the OP/developers at a total consideration of Rs. 25, 71,000/-and the complainant has paid the total consideration amount and the OP/Developers handed over the possession of the scheduled flat to the complainant.

It is the allegation of the complainant that the OP/ developers since thereafter did not execute and register the Deed of conveyance in respect of the schedule flat in favour of the complainant and illegally demanding more amount.

Therefore, the complainant files the case before this District Commission for proper redressal as prayed in the petition.

Further, it is seen from the copy of agreement for sale dt. 10/03/21 made between the parties that under the head “Schedule of payment” on Clause – 4

it is written specifically that the developer and the Vendor shall execute and register proper instrument and transfer of flat together with proportionate in divided share of land  underneath of first schedule, in favour of the purchaser within October 2021 and subject to realization of the entire construction  money of the second schedule.

 Though the entire consideration is paid, but the time limit for registration has not been expired.

In our view, as the time limit for execution and registration of the schedule flat in question has not been expired, the instant complaint is premature one, and the cause of action has not arisen as yet.

Considering the above situation, we are of the view that the case is not maintainable and therefore it is dismissed for want of cause of action, without being admitted.

 Consequently, the prayer for passing interim order is also rejected          

                                               Hence

It is ordered that the CC- 169/2021 is dismissed for want of cause of action without being admitted.

Consequently, the prayer for passing interim order is also rejected.

       Member                                                            President

       Dictated and Corrected by me

       Member