DATE OF FILING : 07-03-2012.
DATE OF S/R : 09-04-2012.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 16-07-2012.
Smt. Kusum Srivastava,
wife of Binod Kumar Srivastava,
residing at Flat No. 301 ( 3rd floor ) of holding no. 38/4,
Kshetra Monhan Mitra Lane, P.S. Golabri, P.O. Salkia,
District –Howrah,
PIN – 711 106, W.B. --------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
1. Sri Anil Kumar Kharakia,
son of Sri Arjun Lal Kharakia,
18/10, Dr. Abani Dutta Road, P.S. Golabari,
District – Howrah,
PIN – 711106.
2. Smt. Kalabari Devi,
wife of Sri Ashok Kumar Shah,
18/19, Dr. Abani Dutta Road, P.S. Golabari,
District – Howrah,
PIN – 711106.
3. Sri Chandan Mazumdar,
67, Jaliapara Lane, P.S. Golabari,
District – Howrah,
PIN – 711106.
4. Smt. Bithi Das,
w/o. Dr. Pranab Das,
5/1, Dolgobinda Sinha Lane, P.S. Golabari,
Howrh – 711106.
5. Smt. Juthi Roy,
w/o. Debaprasad Roy, 5/1, Dolgobinda Sinha Lane,
P.S. Golabari, Howrah,
PIN – 711106.
6. Smt. Indrani Roy,
w/o. Dr. Tapas Roy,
5/1, Dolgobinda Sinha Lane, P.S. Golabari,
Howrah – 711106.
7. Sri Debaki Nandan Sinha,
s/o. late Niranjan Sinha,
5/1, Dolgobinda Sinha Lane, P.S. Golabari,
Howrah – 711106.
8. Sri Samiran Sinha,
s/o. late Niranjan Sinha,
5, Dolgobinda Sinha Lane, P.S. Golabari,
District – Howrah,
PIN – 711106. -----------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. The instant case was filed by complainant, Kusum Srivastava U/S 12 of
the C.P. Act, 1986, as amended against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service U/S 2( 1 )( g ), 2( 1 )( o ) of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for direction upon the O.Ps. to execute and register proper deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant with respect to a 550 sq. ft. flat on the 3rd floor at 38/4, Kshetra Mohan Lane, Howrah – 711106, and for compensation for Rs. 1,50,000/- for the undue delay and litigation costs of Rs. 10,000/-. As the o.ps. in spite of payment of Rs. 4,00,896/- out of the total agreed amount of Rs. 4,75,007.50 turned a deaf ear to the prayer of the complainant and even flouted the order of the promoters’ cell dated 17-10-2011. Hence the complaint.
2. In spite of service of summons the o.ps. did not turn up and file the Written version.
4. Upon pleadings of complainant 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 :
5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. The photo copy of the agreement reflects that the O.Ps. agreed to sell the aforementioned flat at a consideration of Rs. 4,75,007.50. All the o.ps. recorded their signatures in the agreement. The complainant was delivered possession of the flat on 14-06-2003 by virtue of the letter of possession issued on 11-11-2002. Until the execution and registration of the deed of conveyance is complete, the owners of the flat remains shrouded in mystery. In view of the unchallenged testimonies we are of the view that this is a fit case for granting relief to the complainant as per her prayer.
Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 20 of 2012 ( HDF 20 of 2012 ) be allowed ex parte with costs against all the O.Ps.
The O.Ps. be directed to execute and register a proper deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant with respect to the flat mentioned in the schedule within 60 days from the date of this order subject to the payment of the balance consideration money of Rs. 62,700/- by the complainant to the o.ps.
The complainant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 1 lac from the o.ps. for undue delay and for prolonged mental pain and harassment.
The complainant is further entitled to the litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/- from the o.ps.
The o.ps. be directed to pay the total amount aggregating Rs. 1,05,000/- within two months from the date of this order failing the amount shall carry interest @ 12% per annum.
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.
