Shabanam Parveen,

wife of Badruzzama, residing at

4/1, Jola Para Masjid Lane, Shibpur,

District – Howrah.--------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.      Sri  Sunit Das,

son of late Dhajendra Nath Das,

residing at 95/C, Joy Narayan Babu Ananda Dutta Lane,

P.S. Bantra, District – Howrah,

PIN  – 711101.

2.      Sri Subhrojit  Ghosh,

son of Samar Kumar  Ghosh,

residing at 96/1/8, Shibpur Road, P.S. Shibpur,

District – Howrah,

PIN – 711102.

3.      Sri Binoy Kumar Manna,

4.      Sri Samir Kumar Manna,

both sons of late Balaram Manna,

5.      Smt. Debjani Manna,

wife of late Ashok Manna,

residing at 70, Deshpran Sasmal Road,

P.S. Bantra, District – Howrah,

PIN – 711101.------------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                P    R    E     S    E    N     T

President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

Member      :      Shri P.K. Chatterjee.

Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1.                  The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986

wherein the complainant, who purchased a flat as mentioned in the schedule and is in possession of the same, has  prayed for direction upon the o.ps. to execute and register proper sale deed in terms of the agreement dated 03-08-2011 with further prayer to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and other relief.  

2.                  The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 filed separate  written version and contended interalia that

there was no deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant ; that the price assessed at the time of agreement is very low. So the complaint should be dismissed.

3.                  As the O.P. nos. 3, 4 & 5 did not take any step in spite of receipt of the notice,

the matter was heard ex parte vide order no. 5 dated 18-09-2013.

4.                  Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

ii)                  Whether the complainant is  entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

4.      Both the points are  taken up together for consideration. Admittedly the

complainant entered into an agreement for sale for purchase of the flat as mentioned in the schedule measuring 1175 sq. ft. at a total consideration of Rs. 20,00,000/- ( Rupees twenty lacs ) out of which Rs. 19,00,000/- ( Nineteen lacs ) have already been paid only  Rs. 1,00,000/-  remains due. The repeated requests by the complainant went unheeded. We are surprised to note how the O.Ps. could remain complacent and idle in spite of receiving the major portion of the consideration money. It is immaterial if the rate of the sq ft. was softly calculated by the O.Ps. at the request of any person  in position. We cannot traverse beyond the terms of the agreement dated 31-08-2011. We trace gross deficiency in service from the part of the O.Ps. We are, therefore, of the view that this is a fit case where the prayer of the complainant shall be allowed.

      Both the points are accordingly disposed of.

      Hence,     

O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 225 of 2013 ( HDF 225 of 2013)  be  and the same is allowed on contest with costs as against the O.Ps. no. 1 & 2 and ex parte with costs against the O.P. nos. 3, 4 & 5.  

      The O.P. be directed to execute and register the sale deed in respect of the schedule mentioned flat in favour of the complainant  within 30 days from the date of this order after receiving the balance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- ( Rupees one lac ).

      The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 be directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 30,000/- jointly and severally to the complainant for causing mental pain and prolonged harassment.

      The complainant is entitled to a litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/- from the O.P. nos. 1 & 2.

      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.  

  (    T.K. Bhattacharya  )                                               (    T.K. Bhattacharya  )

  President,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                                   President, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.

 (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                              (  P. K. Chatterjee )

 Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                                       Member,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.