Sri Ratan Guria,

son of late Bankim Guria,

residing at 144, Narasingha Dutta Road, P.O. Kadamtala,

P.S. Bantra, District – Howrah,

PIN – 711101.------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.      Sri Prodip Ranjan Mullick,

son of late Paresh Nath Mullick,

of 144, Narasingha Dutta Road, P.O. Kadamtala,

P.S. Bantra, District –Howrah,

PIN  – 711101.

2.      Sri Subrata Pachal,

son of Sri Gopinath Pachal,

of Kashipur, C.T.I., Dasnagar,

District – Howrah,

PIN – 711105. --------------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTY.

                                                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 execute and register the deed of sale in respect of the ‘C’ schedule flat after completing the unfinished works or alternatively to pay compensation of Rs. 75,000/- for the unfinished works and for compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for mental pain, agony and litigation costs as the O.Ps. in spite of receiving the full consideration money as per the agreement dated 26-05-2003 and delivery of possession of the flat  in incomplete condition.

2.                  The o.ps. in the written version contended interalia that the  possession of the

flat was delivered in the month of August,2003 in finished and furnished condition on humanitarian ground though extra payment for extra 60 sq. ft. area is still due from the complainant; that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice. So the complaint should be dismissed. 

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. Admittedly the

complainant is in possession of the flat measuring 626 sq. ft. It is not pertinent if the possession was delivered in August, 2003 as claimed by the O.P. or in the month of Feb’06 as claimed by the complainant. But the persistent claim of the O.Ps. that the  same was delivered in the month of August,2003 is supported by the correspondences made by the O.Ps. to the lawyer of the complainant which probablizes  that the possession was delivered in the month of August, 2003.  

5.      Whatever be the dispute over the possession, the main dispute creeps in over the

payment of consideration money to the O.P and over the rate of square fit Rs. 950/- or Rs. 925/-. Ld. Lawyer for the O.P. submitted that Rs. 44,000/- + interest is still due from the complainant and as soon as the same amount is paid, the O.P.  ready to execute and register the sale deed in favour of the complainant.  

6.      Now let us examine if the apparent is the real. Though the agreement dated 26-05-

2003 shows the area as 566 sq. ft. excess area of 60 sq. ft. was detected after final measurement as per para 15 of the agreement.

7.      Now the question arises if the complainant paid the full consideration money or

Rs. 45,000/- remains due as claimed by the O.P. The money receipts together with the invoice of the ledger account of the complainant ( print out ) confirms that the  O.P. received the total claim amount of Rs. 5,93,925/- and it shows that the rate of square fit finally settled stands as Rs. 925/-. It further shows that the value of the flat measuring the total area of 626 sq. ft. was settled at Rs. 5,79,050/-. The complainant claims that in addition to the full payment of the consideration money he paid and the excess amount to the O.P. to the tune of Rs. 6,20,000/- in total. Whatever be the excess payment, we have no hesitation in our mind that the O.P. received the full consideration money for the flat and his claim for extra amount of  Rs. 44,000/- is just bizarre. He is not entitled to any further amount from the complainant as the invoice ledger account justifies the total payment to the O.P. The claim of the O.P. that the invoice does not contain the signature of the O.P. is just bogus as of the earlier payments are also noted in the invoice showing the dates as embodied in the money receipts. Therefore, we have no hesitation in our mind that the O.P. in spite of receiving the full consideration money are bent upon to extract further amount from the complainant by raising a dispute. Is it believable that the O.P. who delivered possession in the month of August, 2003 was so generous as to remain in deep slumber without receiving the full consideration money from the complainant.

      Therefore, 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. 162 of 2012 ( HDF  162 of 2012 )  be  allowed on contest with  costs  against  the O.Ps. 

      The O.Ps. be directed to  execute and register the sale deed with respect to the flat as mentioned in the ‘C’ Schedule of the complaint measuring 626 sq. ft. within 30 days from the date of this order

      The o.ps. be further  directed to pay a compensation to Rs. 30,000/- to the complainant for causing mental pain and agony and prolonged harassment.  .

      The complainant is further  entitled to a litigation cost of Rs. 5,000 /- from the O.Ps. .

      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.