IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/96/2020
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
28.09.2020 15.10.2020 05.02.2024
Complainant: Shree Prasad Roy @ Gita Prosad Roy
S/o- Dinabandhu Roy
R/of- 5A, Neha Apartment, 69/11 Ukilabad Road,
P.O. & P.S.- Berhampore,
Dist- Murhsidabad
Pin-742101
-Vs-
Opposite Party1.The President (Suchandra Biswas @ Bhowmik),
Of Neha Apartment
Residing at Flat No. 3A, Neha Apartment,
69/11 Ukilabad Road,
P.O. & P.S.-Berhampore, Dist- Murshidabad,
Pin-742101
2. The Cashier, Mandira Ranoo of Neha Apartment,
Residing at Flat No. 4A, Neha Apartment,
69/11 Ukilabad Road,
P.O. & P.S.-Berhampore, Dist- Murshidabad,
Pin-742101
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Elijabeth Moon Bright
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No. 1 : M. Dasgupta
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No. 2 : Rajdip Goswami
Present: Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.
Sri. Nityananda Roy…………………………………….Member.
FINAL ORDER
Sri. ajay kumar das, presiding member.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Shree Pradad Roy @ Gita Prosad Roy (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against The President (Suchandra Biswas @ Bhowmik) of Neha Apartment & Anr. (here in after referred to as the O.P.s) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The complainant & his wife Kanika Roy purchased a flat in Neha apartment Flat No 5-A at 69/11 Ukilabad Road Behampore Murshidabad & since then the above named complainant along with her family has been residing there as an exclusive owner & resident of aforesaid Apartment.
The managing committee got constituted with a view to maintaining the rules & regulations of the aforesaid flat as well as the said managing committee will hold the responsibilities & will discharge the work of repair & the work of the maintenance of roof & walls of the aforesaid flat with the fund of the managing committee. Even the managing committee will take care of the residents of the aforesaid Flat on the complaint placed by the resident of the aforesaid flat.
After a few days of purchase of the flat the complainant is facing trouble & problems such as fissure, crack, dump & damage are being found in the roof, ceiling & in the wall on the portion of the complainant due to heavy down power & incessant rain. The walls, ceiling on the portion of the said flat of the complainant are getting damaged unhygienic unhealthy even the ceiling & walls soak water when it is raining after the ceasing of the rain shower. As a result of it, the valuable articles dress materials & other accessories have been damaged of worth of Rs 50 Fifty thousand. The complainant 's flat has now reduced into a breeding centre of paste specifically mosquito. The flat of the complainant is unsafe & unhygienic. The chunk of ceiling may fall on the family members at any moment. Despite the said complainant along with his family has been living in his flat with constant fear & mental trauma. A serious mishap may be occurred at any moment. In spite of it, the concerned managing committee is completely indifferent with the arisen problem of the flat.
After that the complainant informed the matter to the authority concerned of the aforesaid flat verbally & written application on 15/03/2020. It is hereby stated that the complainant 's wife is also involved in the managing committee of the flat but no importance or attention is paid to the complainant 's wife. The president of the Neha apartment flat is all in all of the committee. Kanika Roy also personally requested the president to take an initiative to solve the problem but the president flatly denied her request.
Thereafter an efficient engineer of the flat was called for inspecting the roof of the flat. The engineer after proper inspection, opined that the roof is ought to be repaired as early as possible. The complainant is agreed to contribute to repair the roof of the flat Neha Apartment as he along with his family has been suffering in body & mind.
After that the complainant submitted an application to the then secretary of the Neha Apartment seeking for co-operation in respect of roof repairing work on 15.03.2020 & the copy of the application was forwarded to the president of Neha Flat but no reply was given though there was a resolution vide No 06 in regard to the roof repair, adopted by virtue of the application submitted by the complainant on 15.03.2020 & the president of Neha Apartment flat managing committee signed in passed resolution on 4/7/2020 but the other flat owners of Neha apartment signed in the resolution on 03.07.2020.
Then the complainant sent a legal to the president & cashier of managing committee of Neha Apartment on 29.08.2020 requesting the President of the managing committee of said Flat to repair the damaged roof of the Neha Flat through his assigned lawyer by a registered post with A/D to the respondents but the notice with A/D was returned.
Finding no other alternative the complainant filed the instant case before the District Commission praying for an order directing the O.P.s to repair the damaged roof & outer surface of the aforesaid flat which is occupied by the complainant & also to direct the O.P.s to pay Rs. 50,000/- as damaged compensation and Rs. 10,000/- for mental harassment totaling Rs. 60,000/-.
Defence Case
O.P. 1 is contested the case by filing W/V contending inter alia that the instant case is not maintainable. The specific case of this O.P. 1 is that it is true that with a view to maintaining the rules and regulations of the apartment, time to time a managing committee was constituted by the flat owners from amongst themselves and the committee discharges their duty as per common consensus and according to the discussion and decision given by the majority of the flat owners of the apartment but it is not true that the work of the committee was to discharge the maintenance of roof and wall of the flat with the fund of the managing committee.
O.P. 2 has specifically stated in the W/V that the Complainant, O.P.s and other flat owners have not got the completion certificate from the Owner cum Developer cum Vendor and that the flats were not officially handed over to the flat owners by the owner cum developer cum vendor.
On the basis of the complaint and the written versions the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :
Points for decision
1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
2. Have the OPs any deficiency in service, as alleged?
3. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:
Point no.1, 2 & 3
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.
Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits that the Complainant is a consumer to the O.P.s. He adds that the managing committee got constituted with a view to maintaining the rules & regulations of the aforesaid flat as well as the said managing committee will hold the responsibilities & will discharge the work of repair & the work of the maintenance of roof & walls of the aforesaid flat with fund of the managing committee. Even the managing committee will take care of the residents of the aforesaid flat on the complaint placed by the resident of the aforesaid flat.
Ld. Advocates for the O.P.s submit that no committee was permanently constituted from time to time a managing committee was constituted by the flat owners from amongst themselves and the committee discharges the duty as per common consensus.
Keeping in mind the submissions advanced by both the parties we peruse the materials on record. We find no existence of permanent committee of flat owners. No constitution of the said committee has been furnished by the parties. Such being the position the purpose of the function of the aforesaid committee are not known to this commission. Such being the position this Commission is not in a position to say whether the Complainant is a consumer of the O.P.s or not.
Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits before this Commission that after a few days of purchase of the flat the complainant is facing trouble & problems such as fissure, crack, dump & damage are being found in the roof, ceiling & in the wall on the portion of the complainant due to heavy down power & incessant rain. The walls, ceiling on the portion of the said flat of the complainant are getting damaged unhygienic unhealthy even the ceiling & walls soak water when it is raining after the ceasing of the rain shower. As a result of it, the valuable articles dress materials & other accessories have been damaged of worth of Rs 50 Fifty thousand. The complainant 's flat has now reduced into a breeding centre of paste specifically mosquito. The flat of the complainant is unsafe & unhygienic. The chunk of ceiling may fall on the family members at any moment. Despite the said complainant along with his family has been living in his flat with constant fear & mental trauma. A serious mishap may be occurred at any moment. In spite of it, the concerned managing committee is completely indifferent with the arisen problem of the flat.
Ld. Advocate for the O.P.s submits the roof of the building is common space of the flat owners. So, if any damage is caused to the roof all the flat owners will suffer. But there is no complaint to that effect by the other flat owners.
After hearing the submissions for both sides we peruse the materials on record. The Complainant has stated in para 5 of the complaint, “ That thereafter an efficient engineer of the flat was called for inspecting the roof of the flat. The engineer after proper inspection, opined that the roof is ought to be repaired as early as possible.” But the point to be noted is that no such inspection report of the engineer concerned is placed before this Commission for the purpose of ascertaining the allegation of the Complainant to that effect.
In view of the matters discussed above we are of the view that the instant complaint case is liable to be dismissed.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 28.09.2020 and admitted on 15.10.2020. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act, 1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.
In the result, the Consumer case fails.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No. CC/96/2020 be and the same is dismissed against the O.P.s under the circumstances without any order as to costs.
Let plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand /by post under proper acknowledgment as per rules, for information and necessary action.
The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:
confonet.nic.in
Dictated & corrected by me.
President
Member President.
