This is a complaint made by one Smt. Anjana Dey, wife of Subrata Kumar Dey of 26/1/2, Jubilee Park, P.O.-Regent Park, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 040 against (1) Sri Saradindu Das, son of Late Sunil Das of 12, Santigarh, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 040, OP No.1,  (2) Sri Nandan Banerjee, son of Late Santosh Banerjee, 201A, Regent Colony, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 040, OP No.2 and (3) Sri Bijoy Krishna Das alias Bijay Das, residing at 2/201C, Shree Colony, P.S.- Jadavpur, OP No.3, praying for an order(a) for registration as per agreement for sale in respect of the flat, in favour of the Complainant, (b) possession of the flat to the Complainant by the OP, (c) stay upon the OP not to transfer the  said flat or not to make any agreement with any other persons, (d)compensation of Rs.5,00,000 and (e) Rs.2,70,000/- as interest.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant was in search of a flat for her family for better accommodation. She entered into an agreement with OP No.1 & OP No.2 for purchasing a flat having area of 600 sq.ft.  valued at Rs.10,00,000/- on the 2^nd floor, southern side of the constructed building on 2/201C, Shree Colony under P.S.-Jadavpur. OP No.1 & 2 showed the registered Power of Attorney given by the landlord to Sri Bijoy Krishna Das alias Bijay Das. OPs also showed deed of landlord in presence of the landlord to the Complainant. OPs told Complainant that since the land belongs to the R.R.Dept. the registration of the said flat could not be done before 13.5.2017 as 10 years would not be completed. But, OPs would deliver the possession. On certain conditions Complainant paid Rs.6,30,000/- to the OPs. But, OPs did not handover possession of the flat to the Complainant. So, Complainant filed this case.

            On the basis of the above facts, complaint was admitted after which OP filed written version with a petition for vacating ex-parte hearing order. However, this Forum rejected the petition of the OP and so the case is heard ex-parte.

Decision with reasons

            Complainant has filed affidavit-in-chief wherein he has reiterated the facts mentioned in the complaint petition. Complainant has filed brief notes on argument.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.

            Complainant has prayed for a direction upon the OPs for handing over possession and registration of the flat.

            In this regard, on perusal of the paragraph 4 of the complaint petition, it appears that Complainant has mentioned that OPs told him that as the landlord has received the deed of land from R.R.Dept. registration cannot be made before 13.5.2017, because 10 years will not elapse. It is clear that this complaint has been filed at a premature stage and as such this Forum is not in a position to direct OP to make registered deed in favour of the Complainant.

            Further, Complainant has stated that OPs can handover possession. On perusal of the affidavit-in-chief of the Complainant and complaint petition, it appears that this statement is not also in accordance with law. Because, if law debarred a person in making registration of the flat in favour of his name the possession also cannot be handed over before expiry of 10 years i.e. before 13.5.2017.

            As such, we are of the view that this complaint has been filed at a premature stage and no relief can be accorded to the Complainant.

            Hence,

ordered

            CC/394/2016 and the same is considered and dismissed.