Judgment : Dt.7.11.2017
Shri S. K. Verma, President.
This is a complaint made by one Joydeep Das, son of Sri Bivas Das, 79/2E, Baderaipur Road, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 029 against Sri Shyamal Pal, son of late Dhirendra Chandra Pal, 3, S.P.C.Block, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 092 praying for a direction upon the O.P. to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of second schedule flat and compensation to tune of Rs.80,000/- and cost of proceeding to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and interest @ 2% per month on the awarded amount till realization.
Facts in brief are that one Jyotsnamoyee Pal was the owner of the property mentioned in 1st schedule after her death her heirs mentioned in Para 2 of the complaint inherited the property. Thereafter, a development agreement was entered into between the heirs of Jyotsnamoyee PaL and City Construction. As per the development agreement five flats were constructed. Complainant entered into an agreement for sale on 19.11.2012 with the OPs for purchasing in respect of one covered area measuring about 70 sq.ft. for a price of Rs.1,00,000/-. Complainant paid the entire consideration money at the time of execution of sale agreement. Complainant requested OP to execute and register the deed of conveyance of 2nd schedule property. But, OP did not oblige. So, Complainant filed this case.
OP No.1 did not contest the case by filing written version and so the case is heard ex-parte.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed a petition praying for treating the complaint as affidavit-in-chief and the prayer was allowed.
Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
On perusal of the prayer portion, it appears that Complainant has sought for a direction upon the OP to execute and register the deed of conveyance. In this regard, Complainant has filed one copy of the possession letter and agreement for sale which was entered into between the Complainant and heirs of Jyotsnamoyee Pal. On perusal of schedule B property, it appears that it is a 70 sq.ft. covered area.
Complainant has made only Shyamal Pal as OP and the agreement for sale has been signed only by Shyamal Pal and not other heirs. Ld. Advocate submitted that Schedule B as a result of amicable settlement fall into the share of Shyamal Pal. However, Shyamal Pal did not act as a developer. He was one of the co-owners. If it is agreed also that he entered into an agreement for sale, it is an agreement for sale between two individuals and the question of deficiency in service on the part of Shyamal Pal is not reflected in any manner whatsoever. As such, this Forum does not have jurisdiction to give a direction for specific performance of the contract. So, we are of the view that this Forum does not have jurisdiction to enforce the right claimed by the Complainant.
Complainant has prayed for compensation, litigation cost and interest. Since this Forum does not have jurisdiction to pass any order over the main relief, the question of awarding compensation, litigation cost and interest do not arise.
Hence,
ordered
CC/268/2017 and the same is dismissed ex-parte.
