Sri  Chandra Mohan Mondal,

son of Jhantu Pada Mondal,

residing at 21, Bon Behari Bose  Road,

P.O. Ramkrishnapur, P.S. & District – Howrah,

PIN – 711 101.------------------------------------------------------------------ COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.      Sri  Amit Gupta,

son of Sri  Arun Kumar Gupta,

residing at 37,  Charu Chandra  Singha Lane,

P.S. & P.O. & District – Howrah,

PIN  – 711101.

2.      Sri Pradeep Shaw,

son of Pannalal Shaw

of 14, Narasingha Bose Lane,

P.S. & P.O. & District – Howrah,

PIN – 711 101.-----------------------------------------------------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 has   prayed for direction upon the o.ps. to deliver possession of flat no. G-1 at 97, Swami Vivekananda  Road, Howrah,  together with the completion certificate and to give free access for new electric connection and to refund Rs. 50,000/- paid to the o.ps. for extra work together with litigation costs and other reliefs as the o.ps. in spite of repeated requests did not deliver cause possession of the suit flat though execution and registration has already been done.  

2.               Sufficient opportunities were given to the o.ps. to file the written version but ultimately the case was heard ex parte as they did not file the written version. 

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.  ?

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. On scrutiny of the record it appears that since after the execution and registration of the deed with respect to the suit flat the o.ps. did not deliver possession of the same on repeated requests. 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. 287 of 2013 ( HDF 287  of 2013 )  be and the same is decreed ex parte with costs against the o.ps.

      The O.Ps. be directed to deliver possession of the suit flat together with a completion certificate within  30 days from the date of this order

      The o.ps. be further directed to refund  sum of Rs. 50,000/- paid to them for extra work and a litigation costs of  Rs. 5,000/-. 

      No order as  to compensation.

      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  )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.