Judgment : Dt.18.1.2018

Shri S. K. Verma, President

            This is a complaint made by (1) Sri Amarjyoti Roy, s/of Late Priyonath Roy, of 3/10, Poddar Nagar Colony-1, P.O.-Jodhpur Park, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 068, South 24-Parganas, (2) Mrs. Sutapa Roy, w/o Sujoy Roy, D/of Sukhomoy Das of  4/7, Poddar Nagar Colony-1, P.O.-Jodhpur Park, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 068, South 24-Parganas against Sri Nishit Dutta, son of Late Dhirendra Nath Dutta, residing at 4/7, Poddar Nagar Colony-1, P.O.-Jodhpur Park, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 068, South 24-Parganas, OP No.1, Miss Lucky Das, daughter of Late Sambhunath Das, OP No.2, Sri Asit Das, son of Late Sambhunath Das, OP No.3, Mrs. Kabita Bhandari, wife of Goutam Bhandari, daughter of Late Sambhunath Das, OP No.4, Sri Amit Das, son of Late Sambhunath  Das, OP No.5 all residing at 4/7, Poddar Nagar Colony-1, P.O.-Jodhpur Park, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata-700 068, South 24-Parganas, praying for a direction upon the O.P. to execute the deed of conveyance in favour of the Complainant and further direction to pay Rs.1,50,000/-as compensation for harassment, mental agony and sufferings and direction upon the OP to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- for unfair trade practice  and litigation cost.

            Facts in brief are that Complainant submitted  that OP No.1 is a developer by profession and is a well known name in the field of developing and constructing properties. OP No.2 to 5 are land owners. Complainants came to know that a residential building has started for construction. The Complainant             being desirous of purchasing a flat o n the  3^rd floor, measuring about 700 sq.ft. super built up area  for a total consideration of Rs.7,50,000/- and the agreement for sale was entered into between the parties on 29.11.2009. Complainant  had further submitted that they paid Rs.7,50,000/- to the OP No.1 who acknowledged it. Thereafter, Complainant was handed over the possession of the flat with the promise to execute the deed of conveyance in respect of the said flat in faour of the Complainant. The Complainants realized that a foul play had been played against did is not being executed in favour of the Complainant. Complainants issued notice. But got no reply and registration was not made. So, Complainant filed this case.

            OPs did not contest the case by filing written version and so the case is heard ex-parte.

Decision with reasons

            Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief.

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.

            On perusal of the prayer portion of the complaint petition, it appears that the Complainant has prayed for a direction upon OPs to execute the deed of conveyance. Since the allegation remained un-rebutted and unchallenged, we are of the view that Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for. Further, it appears that Complainant has prayed for compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-, another Rs.50,000/- for litigation cost and for unfair trade practice.

            Agreement for sale entered into between the parties subscribed to the view that Complainant paid the money.

            Considering the facts and circumstances that if compensation of Rs.30,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- are awarded justice would be served.

Hence,

ordered

             CC/529/2017 and the same is allowed ex-parte in part. OPs are directed to make deed of conveyance in favour of the Complainant within two months of this order. They are also directed to pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- positively within that period, otherwise the above amount shall fetch interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of order till realization.