DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C. C. CASE NO. 19/2015
Date of Filing: Date of Admission Date of Disposal:
07.01.2015 20.01.2015 05.06.2015
COMPLAINANT = Vs. = OPPOSITE PARTIES
Sri Paresh Ghosh 1. Sri Shib Ranjan Das
S/o. Lt. Ganesh Ghosh S/o. Lt. Adhir Ranjan Das
residing at 96, Gopal Lal Tagore Road
18, Ramlal Banerjee Road, P.S.- Baranagar
P.S.-Baranagar. Kolkata-700036,
Kolkata-700036,
2. Sri Sakti Ranjan Das
S/o. Lt. Adhir Ranjan Das
89/A/3, Kashinath Dutta Road,
P.S.- Baranagar,
Kolkata-700036.
3. M/S. Shib Shakti Construction
A partnership firm
represented by
Its Partners
- Sri Shib Ranjan Das
- Sri Sakti Ranjan Das
Both S/o. Lt. Adhir Ranjan Das
Both residing at
101, Kashinath Dutta Road,
P.S.- Baranagar
Kolkata-700036.
J U D G E M E N T
Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this case are re-capitulated as under :-
In diminutive, the fact stated in the complaint, is that, the Complainant entered into an ‘Agreement for Sale’ on 25.01.2006, with both the Opposite Parties, who was/is the absolute owners in respect of the said land and also the Developer, for purchasing a self contained residential flat, being no. G 2, on the Ground floor, measuring an area of 660 sq. ft. super built up area, specifically mentioned in the ‘Second Schedule’ of the complaint, for a total consideration amount of Rs. 5,24,000/- only. Accordingly the Complainant had already paid the entire consideration amount to the Opposite Parties, on different dates, as per the said Agreement for Sale, and consequently the Opposite Parties had handed over the actual vacant possession of the said flat to the Complainant and since then the Complainant are in possession of the same without any disturbance, but failed to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant, in spite of repeated requests.
Ultimately, the Complainant issued a legal notice on 05.11.2014 requesting the Opposite Parties to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant, but of no response, what amounts deficiency and/or negligence in rendering service towards him, for which he has to suffer harassment and mental agony and prayed for compensation. Hence, this case is filed seeking adequate redressal.
Resisting the Complaint, the Opposite Parties filed the Written Version denying the contentions and all material allegations made by the Complainant in the Petition of Complaint and stating, inter alia, that the Complainant has no cause of action to file the instant case, the case is not maintainable and is barred by limitation.
Written & Typed by me Contd. …. 3/-
C. C. Case No. 19/2015
- :: 3 :: -
The case, as a whole, stated by the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2, in crisp, is that, being the Owners of the said land, constituted an unregistered partnership firm under the name & style of “Shib Shakti Construction” for construction of a G+3 multistoried building and the Complainant had entered into an unregistered ‘Agreement for Sale’ dated 25.01.2006 and dated 31.03.2006 with the Opposite Parties for purchasing a residential flat. The Complainant had already paid the entire consideration amount of Rs. 5,24,000/- only as per the said ‘Agreement for Sale’ but failed to pay the said consideration amount within the stipulated time period, for which the Opposite Parties had to suffer loss, in spite of that the Opposite Parties had already delivered the actual vacant possession of the said flat on 28.08.2007 to the Complainant, without getting any interest for delay payment.
Moreover, on verbal request of the Opposite Parties the Complainant had failed to arrange the registration cost and did not get the said flat registered in favour of him and the Complainant never approached before the Opposite Parties for getting the said flat executed and registered in his favour within the limitation period. The Complainant had sent the legal notice dated 03.09.2014 without sending any Draft Deed of Conveyance for approval. The Opposite Parties also replied the same on 16.09.2014 stating that their partnership firm was dissolved and has strictly denied any negligence or/ and deficiency in rendering service on his part. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of this case.
Points for Determination
- Is the complaint maintainable under the C. P. Act ?
- Was there any negligence or deficiency in service
on the part of the O.Ps ?
3. Is the complainant entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?
Decision with Reasons
All the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of convenience and brevity.
The main dispute between the Complainant and the Opposite Parties is that whether the Complainant is entitled to get and the Opposite Parties are liable to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance, in respect of the said flat, in favour of the Complainant, as per the said Agreement for Sale or not.
Written & Typed by me Contd. …. 4/-
C. C. Case No. 19/2015
- :: 4 :: -
We have carefully considered and scrutinized the submission made before us by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant and also the Ld. Advocate for the Opposite Parties No. 1 & 2 and also critically perused all the material documents on record.
On overall evaluation of the argument advanced by the Ld. Advocates of both the parties, and on critical appreciation of the case record, that admittedly two separate ‘Agreement for Sale’s was executed by and between the Complainant and the Opposite Parties on 25.01.2006 and subsequently on 31.03.2006 for purchasing a self contained residential flat, being no. G 2, on the Ground floor, measuring an area of 660 sq. ft. super built up area, specifically mentioned in the ‘Second Schedule’ of the complaint, for a total consideration amount of Rs. 5,24,000/- only.
The record reveals that admittedly the Complainant had already paid the entire consideration amount to the Opposite Parties, on different dates, as per the said Agreement for Sale and consequently the Opposite Parties had handed over the actual vacant possession of the said flat to the Complainant on 28.08.2007 and since then the Complainant are well in possession of the said flat without any disturbances.
Now the actually fact remains that no Deed of Conveyance was executed and registered in respect of the said flat in favour of the Complainant, which was/is very much essential for the Complainant. It is clearly evident from the documents filed by the both parties that both the Complainant and the Opposite Parties blamed each other for not executing the said flat registered and sending legal notices to the other party for doing the same, but ultimately of no result. The Opposite Parties stated that though their partnership firm had actually dissolved they could not execute the said flat registered. But the fact remains that the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2 are not only the Developer of the said multistoried building they are also the Owners of the said land and being the Owners of the land both the Opposite Parties are still bound to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Complainant, as per the said Agreement for sale, at the end of justice.
So, we are of opinion that though it is crystal clear that the Opposite Parties are still bound to do the execution and registration, of the said flat, which was never done by them, without showing any cogent reason, for which we award the adequate compensation and cost in favour of the Complainant against the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2.
Written & Typed by me Contd. …. 5/-
C. C. Case No. 19/2015
- :: 5 :: -
Therefore, in light of the above analysis, we are of the unanimous opinion that the Complainant has successfully proved his case and is entitled to get the relief as prayed for and consequently the points for determination are decided in affirmative.
In short, the Complainant deserves success.
In the result, we proceed to pass
O R D E R
That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against both the Opposite Parties, with cost of Rs. 5,000/- only payable by the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2 to the Complainant within one month from the date of this order.
That the Opposite Parties No. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said flat in question, in favour of the Complainant within one month from the date of this order, in default the Complainant has the liberty to execute the same through the Forum.
The Opposite Party No. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- only to the Complainant, as compensation for harassment and mental agony, within one month from the date of this order.
In the event of non compliance of any portion of the order, by the Opposite Party No. 1 & 2 within a period of one month from the date this order, the Opposite Parties is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 200/- per day from the date of this order till its realization, as punitive damage, which shall be deposited by the Opposite parties in the State Consumer Welfare Fund.
Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.
Member Member President
Written & Typed by me
