Judgment : Dt.20.4.2017
Mrs. Balaka Chatterjee, Member
This petition of complaint has been filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, by Gayatri Das and Netai Chand Das, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs (1) Sri Dilip Das, (2) Sri Ashoke Kumar Das, (3) Baby Das, (4) Smt. Manju Das, (5) Smt. Moly Roy, (6) Sanjay Sharka and (7) Dipak Sharka, in respect of non-delivery of the car parking space to the Complainants.
Case of the Complainants in brief is that they entered into an agreement for sale dt.15.03.2015 in respect of a flat and a car parking space at a consideration of Rs.38,00,000/- with the OP Developers (OP Nos.5 & 6 herein) who by virtue of a Development Agreement dt.26.12.2011 executed by and between the Land-owners (OP Nos.1 to 4 herein) and the Developers empowered to develop a piece of land situated at premises No.4, Satyen Roy Road, P.S.-Behala, Kolkata-700 034, by constructing a G+3 storied building and to enter into agreement for sale with the intending purchaser in respect of the portion allocated to the Developers. The Complainant has also stated that they had paid entire amount of consideration to the developers and the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said flat along with car parking space was registered on 27.04.2015 in favour of the Complainants. It is the specific allegation of the Complainant after receiving possession of the said flat the Complainants found that the said car parking space which had been registered in favour of the Complainants was occupied by another flat-owner to whom the developer further sold the said space. The Complainants have also alleged that the Developers by unauthorized construction of shop room on the ground floor are preventing the Complainant from having facility of the car parking space. Accordingly, the Complainants have prayed for direction upon the OP developers by mandatory injunction to hand over the possession of the scheduled car parking space alternatively, to refund Rs.4,25,000/- only with interest @ 12% p.a. accrued thereon, to remove the unauthorized construction which creates obstruction at the entrance of the car parking space, to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- only and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards cost of litigation.
Notices were duly served upon the OPs but they did not turn up and, therefore, vide Order No.6 dt.5.4.2017 the case was proceeded ex-parte against them.
In course of hearing of the case Ld. Advocate for the Complainant narrated the facts as stated in the petition of complaint.
The Complainant adduced evidence on affidavit.
Points for determination
Whether the instant case is maintainable before this Forum.
Whether there is deficiency in providing service on the part of the OP.
Whether the Complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for.
Decision with reason
Point No.1
The Complainants have availed the service of the OPs in respect of housing construction making payment of consideration amount and thus become consumer under them.
It is evident from the documents on record that value of the said service was fixed as Rs.38,00,000/- since by virtue of a single agreement the Complainants agreed to purchase a flat along with car parking space at a consideration of Rs.38,00,000/-.
However, Section 11(1) of the C.P.Act provides as – “the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed does not exceed rupees twenty lakhs“.
In the instant case value of the service is much higher and the same exceeds the upper limit of the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum and therefore, the petition of complaint is not maintainable before this Forum.
Point No.1 is answered accordingly.
Since the Point No.1 is answered negatively it is of no use to discuss about Point Nos.2 & 3.
In the result, the complaint case does not succeed.
Hence
Ordered
That the Consumer Complaint being number CC/632/2016 is dismissed ex-parte without cost with liberty to the Complainants to approach before the appropriate Forum on same cause of action.
Thus the case is disposed of.
