The present dispute arises over a complaint filed by one Sri Monojit Das and three others against one Sri Rajesh Roy, praying for a direction upon the OP to remove the illegally parked vehicles from the car parking space of the said premises, demolish the illegal construction in the common space of the building, vacate the room in the common space allotted for the accommodation of the security guard and some other reliefs, including payment of compensation and litigation cost to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- and Rs. 35,000/-, respectively.

Case of the Complainants, in short, is that Complainant Nos. 1 & 2, Complainant No. 3 and Complainant No. 4 executed 3 different registered Deed of Conveyance on 09-08-2004, 19-11-2004 and 07-03-2005, respectively, in respect of three different flats, each measuring 825.6 sq. ft. at Premises No. 21F/7, Prince Baktiar Shah Road, Kolkata – 700 033.  OP is the Developer of the said premises.  It is the further case of the Complainants that though they are legally entitled to car parking spaces in the said premises, OP is illegally parking three vehicles of different Motor Training schools, thereby infringing upon the rights of the Complainants and depriving them of their legitimate rights to the car parking spaces.  Moreover, the men and agents of the OP are indulging in car repairing works in the said space and have staked vehicle parts and materials over there, thereby disturbing the peaceful atmosphere of the residential complex.  The OP has further caused illegal construction in the form of a wash room in the common space of the building.  It is the further allegation of the Complainants that despite several requests, the OP has not yet handed over the completion certificate of the premises to any of the Complainants.  In such circumstances, Complainants filed this case for relief.

OP, on the other hand, vehemently denied the claim of the Complainants that they are entitled to car parking spaces in the said premises or that he is illegally parking three motor cars in the building thereby infringing upon the rights of the Complainants and depriving them of their legitimate rights to the car parking spaces or that respective flat owners have right, title, and interest over the car parking spaces, but due to illegal acts of the OP, they are not able to use and enjoy the same or that men and agents of the OP are indulging in car parking works in the said space and have staked vehicle parts and materials over there, thereby disturbing the peaceful atmosphere of the residential complex.  It is claimed by the OP that he was the absolute owner of the premises in question and after obtaining the sanction building plan, constructed a multistoried building containing several flats and car parking space.  Thereafter, the OP sold out the flats of the building to intending purchasers, including the Complainants.  As such, the entire ground floor, including few car parking space of the building, is still in possession of the OP.  So, this OP has every right to enjoy the ground floor and car parking space by keeping his car and/or have right to let out the said car parking space being the absolute owner of the said car parking space.  Accordingly, the OP prayed for dismissal of the case.

Point for determination is whether the Complainants are entitled to the reliefs sought for by them.

Decision with reasons

Admittedly, Deed of Conveyance in respect of all the flats has been executed in the year 2004/2005, whereas, the present complaint case is filed on 10-12-2015, i.e., after more than 11/10 years since execution of the Deed of Conveyance concerned. Accordingly, the present case appears to be hopelessly time barred and hence, not maintainable.

It appears, the present case is filed out of the conviction of the Complainants that they are entitled to car parking spaces in the ground floor of the said building.  However, on perusal of the photocopies of the Deed of Conveyance, it appears that none of the same bestows any such right upon the Complainants.  On the contrary, it appears from the photocopies of Deed of Conveyance dated 19-11-2004 and 07-03-2005 on record that the rights of the Complainants stand confined to the flats in question along with proportionate share of land and other common areas and facilities excluding anything of the ground floor area consisting of garage space/car parking space and one office room and toilet along with its proportionate share of the said land.  In such circumstances, we find no merit in the contention of the Complainants. 

As regards other disputes, it appears that the nature of disputes as pointed out in the petition of complaint are purely civil in nature and requires elaborate evidence to come to any conclusion about the veracity of such allegations.  Unfortunately, Consumer Forum cannot decide such issues in summary jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the present complaint case stands dismissed being not maintainable.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

that CC/78/2015 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OP, but without any costs.