Shri Probodh Kr. Mondal,

son of Shri Nokuleswar Mondal,

residing at Nischinda, P.O. Ghoshpara,

P.S. Nischinda, District – Howrah,

PIN – 711227. ------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.    Shri Dipak Kundu,

       son of late Jagabandhu Kundu,

       residing at 5, Kabi Bhrat  Chandra  Road,

       P.S. Dumdum, Kolkata – 700028,

       North 24 Parganas.

2.    Smt.  Sunanda Kundu,

       wife of Shri  Dipak Kundu,

       residing at 5, Kabi Bhrat  Chandra  Road,

       P.S. Dumdum, Kolkata – 700028,

       North 24 Parganas.

       both o.p. nos. 1 & 2’ official address

       is 162/A. Bihari Dutta Bagan Road,

       ( Jessore Road ), Kolkata – 700028.---------------------------------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 either  delivery of the agreed flat at the 1^st floor or to refund the consideration money together with interest and for compensation together with  litigation costs as  in spite of receiving Rs. 10,02,500/- the o.ps. did not deliver the flat as well as the shop room as per agreement dated 28-09-2011.  

2.               The o.ps. in their written version contended interalia that they are ready to transfer the flats after  receiving the balance consideration money on the same could not be delivered for the obstinacy of the owner of the said property

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. From the enclosures it is palpable that the o.ps. received Rs. 10,02,500/- from the complainant out of the total agreed amount of  Rs. 22 lakhs approximately for the flat and the shop room. It is unfortunate that in spite of investing Rs. 10,02,500/- the o.ps. are sitting tight over the delivery of the same. In such circumstances, we are of the view that this is  a fit case where the prayer of the complainant shall be allowed. Both the points are accordingly disposed.

      Hence,

O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 233 of 2013 ( HDF 233 of 2013 )  be  allowed on contest with  costs  against  the O.Ps. 

      The O.Ps. be directed to refund the sum of Rs. 10,02,500/-  to the complainant together with the interest @ 10% p.a. since September, 2011 till full satisfaction within 30 days from the date of this order.

      The o.ps. do also pay a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation  for causing mental pain, agony  and prolonged harassment to the complainant.

      The o.ps. do further pay a litigation costs of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order.

      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.