This is a complaint made by one Bamdev Banerjee, son of Late Makhan Lal Banerjee, 22/5A, Sahapur Colony, Kolkata-700 053, against (1) Sri Kumares H Halder, son of Late Monindra Chandra Halder, 22/3, Sahapur Colony, Kolkata-700 053, P.S.- New Alipore, OP No.1 and (2) Smt. Hemlata Biswas, wife of Late Hiralal Biswas, 22/3, Sahapore Colony, Kolkata-53, P.S.-New Alipore, OP No.2, praying for direction upon the OP to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the Complainant in respect of the flat and for compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.1,00,000/-.
Facts in brief are that the Complainant was in search of a flat for his residential accommodation and he learnt that OP No.1 is going to construct a building at 23A, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata-700 053. OP No.2 was the owner of the landed property measuring about more or less 2 cottahs 16 sq.ft. being premises No.23/A, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkakta-700 053. OP No.2 entrusted OP No.1 developer for raising construction. OP No.2 being owner executed a development agreement in favour of OP No.1. Complainant agreed to purchase a flat being No.401 on the 3rd floor, measuring built up area more or less 561 sq.ft. at premises No.23/A, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata-700 053, P.S.- New Alipore at a consideration of Rs.3,75,000/-.
Complainant paid the entire amount to OP No.1 who handed over the possession to the Complainant. After possession Complainant took electric connection at the premises. Complainant requested the OP to execute register the deed of conveyance in respect of the said flat. But, OP did not do so. OP No.1 & 2 failed and neglected to discharge their statutory duties by not executing the deed of conveyance. Complainant issued notice upon the OP 26.5.2016 and after receiving the notice OP No.2 being owner replied that the said agreement for sale is actually a loan transaction and they will not execute the deed of conveyance. The Complainant replied stating that the said statement of OP No.2 as an after thought and as an attempt to deprive the Complainant from getting natural justice to avoid responsibility and liability in respect of execution of deed of conveyance. So, Complainant filed this case.
On the basis of above facts the complaint was admitted. Thereafter Complainant filed track report which reveals that notices were served upon the OP. But, OP did not file written version and did not appear to contest the case. So, the case is heard ex-parte.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief where he has reiterated the facts mentioned in the complaint petition. Complainant has also filed short notes on argument in the form of document.
Main point for determination is whether the Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
On perusal of the Xerox copy of the agreement, it appears that by this agreement for sale OP agreed to hand over the flat to the Complainant after getting consideration price of Rs.3,75,000/-.
Further, it appears that OPs have admitted that the Complainant paid Rs.3,75,000/- to the OP. Since the allegation of the Complainant remained un-challenged and un-rebutted, we are of the view that Complainant is entitled to the reliefs of making a registration deed in his favour.
So far as compensation and litigation cost are concerned, it appears that there is no ground for an order for compensation and litigation cost in favour of the Complainant.
Hence,
ordered
CC/301/2016 and the same is allowed ex-parte in part. OPs are directed to register the conveyance deed in favour of the Complainant within 3 months of this order.
