Smt. Sarmistha Mukhopadhyay,

wife of Sri Molay Mukhopadhyay and daughter

of late   Sachindranath Middya,

residing at 5, Kumarpara Lane, P.S. Bantra,

District – Howrah. -------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.      Sri Kallol  Ghosh,

son of late Nandalal Ghosh alias Nandalal Banduri.

2.      Sri Hillol Ghosh,

son of late Nandalal Ghosh alias Nandalal Banduri.

3.      Sri Basudeb  Ghosh,

son of late Nandalal Ghosh alias Nandalal Banduri,

all are residing at 6, Makardah Road, P.O. Kadamtala,

P.S. Bantra,  District – Howrah,

PIN  – 711101.

4.      Smt. Iva Patra,

wife of Joydeb Patra,

residing at 13/5, Ramakanata Bose Street,

Kolkata – 700003.

5.      Smt. Baijyonti Mallick,

wife of Sri Ramesh Mallick,

residing at 19,  Chetal Central Road,

Kolkata – 700027.

6.      Smt. Marry Ghosh,

wife of Sri Rashbehari  Ghosh,

residing at 35, Kalipada Mukherjee  Road,

Kolkata – 700027.

7.      Smt. Shelly Ghosh,

wife of  Sri  Subodh Kumar Ghosh,

residing at 198/1, Rashbehari Avenue,

Kolkata – 700019,

8.      Sri Amti Hait,

son of  Sri Rabin Hait,

residing at 24/7/4, Brindaban Mullickk Lane,

Howrah – 711101,

proprietor of Astha Developer,

a  proprietorship firm having its office

place at 2/1, Makardah Road, P.S. Bantra, P.O. Kadamtala,

District – Howrah,

PIN – 711101.-----------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                P    R    E     S    E    N     T

President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

Member      :      Shri P.K. Chatterjee.

Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1.               The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has  prayed for direction upon the o.ps. to execute and register the deed of sale in respect of the ‘B’ schedule flat in favour of the complainant and to complete the unfinished work of the same or to refund the advance money with 15% interest and to pay compensation to the tune of  Rs. 1 lakh  together with litigation costs as the o.ps. in spite of  repeated requests did not deliver the ‘B’ schedule flat to the complainant in violation of the agreement dated 27-04-2009. Hence the complaint.

2.               The o.p. nos. 1 to 8 contested the case by filing written version contending interalia that civil suits and writ petitions are pending over the identical issues.  So the complaint should be dismissed. 

3.                  Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)                    Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

ii)                  Whether the complainant is  entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

4.               Both the points are  taken up together for consideration. Admittedly the o.p. no. 8 received Rs. 16,30,000/- through cheques from the complainant as part payment out of the total consideration of Rs. 18 lakhs. Admittedly Title  Suit No. 128 of 1987 and Writ Petition vide no. 24128 (W) of 2013 are pending. It is, therefore, crystal clear that there is legal bar in executing the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant with respect to the schedule mentioned property.

5.               Since the receipt of Rs. 16,30,000/- by the o.p. no. 8 is admitted position, he has no way out than to refund the same together with interest and to pay compensation.

           Both the points are accordingly disposed of.

      Hence,

O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 380  of 2013 ( HDF 380 of 2013 )  be  and the same is allowed on contest   against  the O.P. no. 8, Amit Hait,  with costs and ex parte against the rest without costs.   

      The O.P. no. 8  be directed to refund the sum of Rs. 16,30,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order together with interest @ 9% p.a. since 29-04-2009 till full satisfaction failing the amount shall carry interest @ 15% p.a. till full recovery.

      The o.p. no. 1  do  pay a sum of Rs.1 lakh to the complainant for  causing mental pain, frustration and  prolonged harassment and  to pay  Rs. 5,000/- as litigation costs.

      The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.

  (    T.K. Bhattacharya  )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.