DATE OF FILING                    :     26.08.2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      20.11.2014.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     31.07.2015.

Sri Nayan Tara Ghora,

son of late Hemanta Kumar Ghora,

residing at village & P.O. Dihi Ratanpur, P.S. Singur,

District Hooghly,

PIN 712409,

at present residing at 88, Dharmatala Road, P.O. Belurmath, P.S. Bally,

District Howrah,

PIN 711202…………………………………………………………….. COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

1.         Sri Shibnath Shaw,

            son of Shukdeb Shaw,

            residing at 88, Dharmatala Road, P.O. Belur Math, P.S. Bally,

            District Howrah,

            PIN 711202.

2.         Sri Sonu Shaw,

            son of Sri Shibnath Shaw,

            residing at 88, Dharmatala Road, P.O. Belur Math, P.S. Bally,

            District Howrah,   

PIN  711202.………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                P    R    E     S    E    N     T

             Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

                               Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                        Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. Complainant, Nayan Tara Ghora,  by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to execute and register the deed of conveyance alternatively to refund the deposited amount of Rs. 10,40,000/- with 18% p.a. interest  from 01.03.2013, to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension, agony, unnecessary harassment and Rs. 15,000/- as litigation costs along  with other relief or reliefs as the  Forum may deem fit and proper. 
2. Brief fact of the case is that complainant paid an advance amount of Rs.390000/- towards the purchase of a self contained flat from O.Ps. For that purpose the parties entered in to an agreement for sale on 13/07/2010 vide Annexure. There after as per the Fouth schedule, which detailed the mode of further payment to be made by the complainant to the o.ps., complainant paid same more lacs of money to the o.ps. out of total consideration money of Rs.1300000/-. But till the filing of this case O.Ps. did not handover the possession of the flat although complainant sent several lawyer’s notice to the o.ps. since 24/12/2011 vide annexures. Being frustrated and finding no other alternative complainant filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid relief.

Notices were served upon o.ps. O.Ps. appeared and filed W/V.

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.  ?

2. Whether the complainant is  entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

4. O.Ps. have denied and disputed all allegations made out by the complainant against them. Categorically they have denied the total amount of payment made by the complainant. O.Ps. have accepted the payment of Rs.6,50,000/- only made by the complainant towards the purchase of the said flat vide para 18/ (a) and (c ).But due to the pendency of the civil suit being T.S. No 163 of 2010 filed before Ld. Court of 1^st civil Judge (Jr. Divi) at Howrah, o.ps. could not complete the building at the scheduled premises. So they could not handover the flat to the complainant. And they also returned Rs.50,000/- to the complainant vide para 18 (f) of this W/V. But they have not annexed any document in support of their such claim. And on careful scrutiny of the documents filed by the complainant, we find that the complaint paid Rs.6,50,000/- in total. But O.Ps. failed to handover the possession of the flat in question which is nothing but deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. We all know that the shelter is a basic necessity for human being O.Ps. neither returned the total amount advanced by the complainant nor delivered the possession of the flat which caused severe mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant. Accordingly we hold O.Ps. to be deficient in service. So it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainant should be allowed.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No.  475 of 2014 ( HDF  475 of 2014 )  be  allowed on contest with  costs  against  the O.Ps. 

      That the  O.Ps. are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs. 6,50,000/- to the complainant within one month from this order

       That they are further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as litigation costs.

      That the o.ps. are further directed to pay the entire amount of Rs.7,10,000 to the complainant  within one month from the date of this order i.d., the aforesaid  amount shall carry an interest @ 10% per annum till full realization.

      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.  

  (    Jhumki Saha)                                              

  Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.