Sri Alak Sinha filed a consumer case on 27 Aug 2024 against Sri Subhradeep Majumder. in the West Tripura Consumer Court. The case no is CC/35/2023 and the judgment uploaded on 28 Aug 2024.
1.This petition U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 has been filed by Alak Sinha here-in-after called the complainant petitioner against Sri Subhradeep Majumder and Jayanta Pal here-in-after called the O.Ps.
1.1Complainant entered into an agreement with the O.P. for purchasing 3BHK Flat No- A3 in the 3rd floor comprising 1126 sq. ft. including one free car parking place in the ground floor for Rs.42,50,650/-. At the time of entering the agreement Rs.5,50,000/- was paid as advance and thereafter paid the entire consideration amount to the O.P. The flat was to be completed within 18 months plus 6 months as grace period from the date of getting permission of AMC. But inspite of expiry of the period of construction the O.Ps failed to hand over the flat to the complainant.
1.2Later on the complainant and other purchasers issued letter to the O.Ps that although 95% amount was paid but some works like tiles, OTIS lift, roof treatment, roof-top community hall, marble work on the staircase, water & electricity connectivity, boundary walls, doors & windows, front gate had either been left half done or not even started and requested the O.Ps to complete such works within 15th April, 2020. However, being insisted by the O.Ps either the works will be completed immediately the complainant on good faith took possession of the flat in the month of December, 2022 and accordingly on 27th December, 2021 Sale Deed was executed between the complainant and O.P. No.1 and O.P. No.2 but the O.Ps have not completed the work. The half done works has been mentioned in details in para 16 of the complaint i.e., 18 items. Since, the O.Ps have not completed the work this complaint have filed for passing a direction to the O.Ps to complete the half done works or not even done works and to pay compensation to the complainant.
2.The O.P. No.1 did not contest the case inspite of submitting written objection on 03.08.2023 as such vide order dated 12.01.2024 the case has been proceeding exparte against the O.P. No.1.
2.1During the course of proceeding it was found that O.P. No.2, Jayanta Pal is a necessary party as he is the owner of the land as such vide order dated 26.02.2024 he was added as O.P. No.2 and summon was issued against him.
2.2The O.P. No.2 on 30.05.2024 filed a petition that in case No- CC-319/2022 Final Order was passed against the O.P. No.1 and O.P. No.2 was not a party in that case. However, in written objection the O.P. No.2 pleaded that Sale agreement was executed in between the complainant and the O.P. No.1 and as such the O.P. No.2 has nothing to do. And the O.P. No.2 caused no hindrance in the construction of the flat.
3.The complainant submitted evidence on affidavit including documents.
4.Hearing argument we find that in the Sale Deed dated 27.12.2021, Jayanta Paul, O.P. No.2 was also a party. Further, Jayanta Paul, O.P. No.2 is the owner of the land and O.P. No.1, Subhradeep Majumder is the developer.
5.In the result, it is ordered that the O.P. No.1 is liable to complete the half done works or not done at all works of the flat as per the agreement within 3 months from today otherwise the O.P. No.1, Subhradeep Majumder shall pay Rs.10 lakhs to the complainant as compensation within 30 days from today with interest @ 7.5% P.A. from today till the date of actual payment.
6.The case stands disposed off.
7.Supply copy of this final Order to the parties free of cost.
Announced.
SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA
SRI SAMIR GUPTA
MEMBER,
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.