DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL COMMISSION
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C. C. CASE NO. 17/2020
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
07.02.2020 18.02.2020 08.04.2022
Complainant/s:- | Dr. Jitendra Kumar, S/o Late Ramjee Thakur, Residing at House No. 18, Naya Basti, Near Sitala Mandir, Vill & P.O. – Harharguttu, Presently at, C/o Debasis Ghosh, 85 Surath Chandra Ghosh Street, Charaktalla, Ichapore, P.O. – Nawabganj, Dist:- North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743144, P.S. - Noapar -Vs- |
Opposite Party/s:- | - SRI SWAPAN KUMAR KOLEY, Alias GHOSH, S/o Late Anil Chandra Koley Alias Ghosh, Residing at, Ichapore Nepal Chandra Koley Street, Kumar Para, P.O. – Ichapore Nawabganj, Dist:- North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743144, P.S. – Noapara
- LOTUS CONSTRUCTION GROUP, Having its registered office at Ramnagar, Ichapore, P.O. – Ichapore Nawabganj, Dist:- North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743144, P.S. Noapara, Represented by its partners
- SRI CHANDAN KANTI MITRA, Residing at Ramnagar, Ichapore, P.O. – Ichapore Nawabganj, Dist:- North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743144, P.S. Noapara.
- SRI MANOJ BISWAS, S/o Sri Haripada Biswas, Residing at, Birnagar (Lockgate), P.O. – Bengal Enamel, Dist:- North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743122, P.S. – Titagarh.
- SRI NARAYAN BISWAS, S/o Late Ranjit Biswas, Residing at, Birnagar (Lockgate), P.O. – Bengal Enamel, Dist:- North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743122, P.S. – Titagarh.
- SRI TARUN BAGCHI, S/o Late Arabinda Bagchi, Residing at Birnagar (Lockgate), P.O. – Bengal Enamel, Dist:- North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743122, P.S. – Titagarh.
- SRI ANIL KRISHNA SARKAR, Residing at, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Road, Sreepally, Palta, P.O. – Bengal Enamel, Dist:- North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743122, P.S. – Titagarh.
|
P R E S E N T :- Shri Debasis Mukhopadhyay…………President.
:- Smt. Monisha Shaw …………………. Member.
JUDGMENT / FINAL ORDER
This complaint is filed by the Complainant U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended up to date) alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs did not take any step to redress his grievance till filing of this complaint.
The Complainant stated that the O.P. No. 2,3,4 and 6 are the Developers and O.P. No. 1 is land owner of the land measuring 6 Cottahs 6 chittaks more or less lying and situated at Mouza Ichhapur, J. L. No. 3, Re.Su. No. 89, Touzi No. 617, comprised and contained in R.S. Dag No. 2012 / 8070 under the R.S. Khatian No. 688, under North Barrackpore Municipality at Ward No. 1, Holding No. 827 of Nepal Chandra Koley Street, P.S. Noapara, District – North 24 Parganas described in ‘First Schedule’. The Complainants stated that O.P. No. 1 while thus seized and possessed of or otherwise well and sufficiently entitled to the said plot of
Contd. To Page No. 2 . . . ./
: : 2 : :
C. C. CASE NO. 17/2020
land entered into an agreement for development on 09/03/2015 for construction of a proposed building (G+4) comprising of several flats shop, garages upon the said property with the Opposite Party No. 2 to 6 by incorporating certain terms and conditions. O.P. No. executed a registered development Power of Attorney being deed No. 1046 in favour of the Developer to do all such acts on behalf of O.P. No. 1 to make construction of the building as per sanctioned building plan from Barrackpore Municipality by the intending purchaser by entering the agreement or agreements of developers allocation by the developer owners allocation by the land owner. As per agreement for sale dated 14/04/2017 was made between the Complainant and the opposite Party No. 1 wherein it has been agreed that Opposite Party No. 1 will sell self-contained south-east side residential flat identified by Flat No. 1/C measuring about more or less 850 sq.ft. super built-up consisting 2 bed rooms, 1 dining room, open kitchen room, 1 toilet, 1 Verandaha located at 1st Floor, North-West corner of the premises namely “SREEMA APARTMENT“ morefully and particularly described in the First Schedule property under North Barrackpore Municipality at Ward No. 6, Holding No. 827 of Nepal Chandra Koley Street, P.S. Noapara, District – North 24 Parganas at consideration price of Rs.2,000/-per squre feet I,e total consideration price of Rs.17,00,000/-.
The Complainant made a legal notice on 26.07.2019 through his Ld. Lawyer with a request to Opposite party no 1 to deliver the possession of the said flat and to execute the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Complainant on payment of balance consideration money but the Opposite Party No 1 did not give any response.
Prayer of the Complainant:-
- Issue notice upon the O.Ps for their appearance and S/C
- After hearing, give a direction upon the O.Ps to deliver the peaceful possession as per agreement for sale with Completion Certificate of the flat mentioned under scheduled below and execute the deed of conveyance in favour of the Complainants.
- Give a direction upon the O.Ps to pay a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- only as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment.
- Litigation cost of Rs. 20,000/-.
- To pass such other order / orders may deemed fit and proper.
The O.P. did not contest by filing W/V or any other documents. According to the record the Complainants issued notice upon O.Ps and the O.Ps had received the notices on 11/01/2021 but the O.Ps did not turned up to contest the complaint and did not file W/V. On 26/02/2021 vide order no. 05 the case do run ex – parte against the O.P No. 2 to 7 and on 31/12/2021 vide order no. 07 the case do run ex – parte against the O.P. No. 1.
Following issued were framed for the purpose of decision:-
- Whether the complaint is maintainable or not?
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to get relief / reliefs in this case.
Decision with reasons:-
Considering the facts and circumstances as well as nature and character of this case all the points are interlinked to each other and as such all the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of brevity and convenience.
On perusal of the materials along with the supporting affidavit related to documents available in the case record as well as hearing of argument by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant, it is revealed that the Complainant paid an amount of Rs. 12,00,000/- as part payment towards consideration to the Opposite Party No. 1 and the rest amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- will be paid at the time of execution. At the time of physical possession of the concerned flat.
Contd. To Page No. 3 . . . ./
: : 3 : :
C. C. CASE NO. 17/2020
It is mentioned that the Opposite Parties shall deliver the possession of the said flat within 12 months from the date of execution of the agreement for sale dated 14/04/2017. But after receiving the total amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- paid by the Complainant only out of total consideration price of Rs. 17,00,000/- to the O.P. No. 1.
total flat value to the Developer / O.Ps. Here the status of the OPs / Developer is service provider and the Complainant being a customer of the O.Ps, so the Complainant becomes a consumer as per Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Hence, for ends of justice:
It is
Ordered
That the instant case being no. 17/2020 is allowed with cost against the O.Ps / Developer.
The Complainants, Sri Dr. Jitendra Kumar, S/o Late Ramjee Thakur do get a decree of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation cost.
The O.P No. 1 Sri Swapan Kumar Koley representative of Lotus Construction Group is hereby directed to deliver the Peaceful Possession as per agreement for sale with Completion Certificate within 03 months from the date of the decree.
The O.Ps are also directed to execute the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Complainant within 03 months from the date of delivery of judgment and pay the aforesaid decretal amount to the Complainant within 03 months from this date, failing which the Complainant is at liberty to put this decree into execution according to law.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR, 2005.
Dictated & Corrected by me
Member
Member President
