Judgment : Dt.30.10.2017
Shri S. K. Verma, President.
This is a complaint made by one Malay Kumar Guha, 52/A, Jadu Nath Ukil Road, P.S.-Haridevpur Kolkata-700 041 against Sri Indrajit Ghosh, s/o Sri Monamohan Ghosh, 24/15, Jadu Nath Ukil Road, P.S.-Haridevpur Kolkata-700 041, OP No.1 and Sri Amoy Kumar Das, s/o Late Purno Chandra Das, 89, Sodepur 2nd Lane, P.S.-Haridevpur, Kolkata-700 082, OP No.2, praying for a direction upon the OPs to hand over possession of the flat and garage and making a conveyance deed in favour of the Complainant and also a direction upon the OP to pay Rs.1,60,000/- as incidental charges, mental agony and harassment and litigation cost.
Facts in brief are that Sri Indrajit Ghosh entered into an agreement and power of attorney with the land-owner, Sri Amoy Kumar Das for development of a multi storied building at KMC premises No.89, Sodepur 2nd Lane, P.S.-Haridevpur, Kolkata-700 082. On the basis of that agreement on 19.10.2012, Malay Kumar Guha, Complainant and OP No.1 entered into a final agreement for sale for a self-contained flat measuring an area of more or less 600 sq.ft. and garage of 140 sq.ft. After signing of the agreement, it was taken by OP No.1 for notary. But, OP No.1 did not return it. The flat and the garage were to be handed over to the Complainant within 48 months i.e. within 19.10.2016. Out of Rs.11,50,000/-,Complainant paid Rs.2,00,000/- vide UBI’s cheque No.87053 on the date of signing it. Again as per demand of OP No.1, Complainant paid Rs.2,00,000/- on 27.12.2012, vide UBI’s cheque No.87059. As OP No.1 did not return the agreement duly notarized, Complainant cannot recall the payment schedule and OP No.1 told him that further payment is not required because construction is stopped due to some unavoidable reasons. After expiry of the handing over date, Complainant requested the OP No.1 time and again to complete the balance transaction and hand over the possession of the flat and garage after executing the deed of sale. But OP No.1 did not do that. Complainant sent a letter dt.10.1.2017 to OP No.1. Complainant tried to lodge FIR with Haridevpur P.S. But, staff members of Haridevpur P.S. refused the FIR. So, Complainant filed this case.
OP No.1 did not contest the case by filing written version and so the case is heard ex-parte.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed a brief argument in writing for proving the allegation.
Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
On perusal of the prayer portion, it appears that Complainant has prayed for registration of the conveyance deed of the flat and garage in his favour. At the outset, on perusal of the complaint, it does not appear that any schedule of flat is mentioned herein. Only the super built area is mentioned as 600 sq.ft. and a garage of 140 sq.ft. A copy of the first page of agreement is filed, which does not reveal as to what was the content of this agreement. Xerox copy of bank statement is filed. Complainant has alleged that the agreement was taken by OP No.1 and was never returned. This can hardly be believed. Further, no copy of development agreement is filed which makes it clear that this Forum does not have jurisdiction over the dispute raised by the Complainant. No receipt is filed to establish that Complainant paid Rs.4,00,000/- to the OP No.1. Original Pass Book has also not been filed, from where it would have been ascertained that Complainant paid Rs.4,00,000/- to the OP No.1. The purpose of payment is not available on record.
Accordingly, we are of the view that Complainant failed to prove the allegations against OP.
Hence,
ordered
CC/100/2017 and the same is dismissed ex-parte.
