West Bengal

Siliguri

CC/95/2018

SRI SUMIT SAHA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SRI DIPANKAR PAUL - Opp.Party(s)

ROHIT AGARWAL

01 Oct 2018

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Siliguri
Kshudiram Basu Bipanan Kendra (2nd Floor)
H. C. Road, P.O. and P.S. Prodhan Nagar,
Dist. Darjeeling.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/95/2018
( Date of Filing : 11 Sep 2018 )
 
1. SRI SUMIT SAHA
S/O LATE NANDALAL SAHA, R/O SHANTIPUR,P.O-KADAMTALA,P.S.-MATIGARA,PIN-734011.
DARJEELING
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. SRI DIPANKAR PAUL
S/O SRI SATYA PADA PAUL, R/O S.P.MAUKHERJEE ROAD,ATHARAKHAI, P.O-KADAMTALA,P.S.-MATIGARA,PIN-734011.
DARJEELING
2. SRI GOUTAM BHOUMIK
S/O LATE RAM GOPAL BHOUMIK, R/O SANTIPUR, P.O-KADAMTALA,P.S.-MATIGARA,PIN-734011.
DARJEELING
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shri Subhabrata Chaudhuri PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Shri Tapan Kumar Barman MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:ROHIT AGARWAL, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 01 Oct 2018
Final Order / Judgement

To-day is fixed for admission hearing.

Ld advocate for the complainant files hazira.

Heard the Ld lawyer. Perused the complaint and the documents thereto.

The case of the complainant is, in brief, that he entered into an agreement on 04.06.2012 with OP No.1 for purchase of a flat at a price of Rs.900,000/-, the entire of which was paid in advance in 05 phases direct to the OP No.1 and lastly on request of OP No.1 in 02 phases to J.C.B. service provider and cement seller.  The flat was agreed to be handed over by 18 months from the date of execution of the agreement.  The complainant, however, did not/could not enclose any receipt from the OP acknowledging the said advance payments  except that which was made on 13.08.2013 of Rs.200,000/-.

In Para 15 at P/6 of the complaint, the complainant stated that the cause of action arose first on 04.06.2012 the date of execution of agreement and lastly in the month of April 2017 when he refused to pay any extra amount to the OP No.1. Even the date of such refusal is, in spite of its being unwritten, treated to be the cause of action, the complainant stands barred by limitation as prescribed in section 24A of the C.P. Act 1986.  The complainant did not/could not furnish also copy of letter, if sent, urging the OP No.1 to hand over the flat on the failure of OP No.1 to do so by the stipulated date, i.e., 04.12.2013 or any lawyer’s notice thereafter, if served upon the OP No.1, in order to substantiate the continuation of the cause of action as claimed.

Hence the case is not admitted.

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shri Subhabrata Chaudhuri]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Shri Tapan Kumar Barman]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.