Minakshi Chakraborty,  Presiding Member.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:      This case has been filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the complainant that the opposite party nos. 4 to 7 and Srikumar Banerjee, since deceased (father of opposite pasty nos. 8 and 9) being the landowners of the aforesaid property represented by their Constituted Attorneys entered into one development agreement with the opposite party nos. 1 to 3 on 9^th March, 2009 on certain terms and conditions and also executed one power of attorney in favour of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 and the complainant purchased a flat from the project of the opposite party nos. 1 to 3 measuring about 800 sq.ft. being flat no. 303 at the South Western side on the 2^nd floor, at Mouza- Uttarpara, J.L. No. 12, comprised in R.S. Dag no. 435/5327 under Khatian no. 2120 corresponding to L.R. Dag no. 649 under L.R. Khatian No. 4351/1, 4351, 4376, 1512, 141/1, 2715, 3545 being municipal holding no. 18/4, Rajendra avenue 3^rd lane, within the ambit of the Uttarpara- Kotrung Municipality, P.O. & P.S. Uttarpara, A.D.S.R. Office- Serampore, dist. Hooghly which is more fully described in the schedule and for a total purchase price of flat at Rs. 9,00,000/- and the complainant had paid the total consideration price on different dates and got possession of the flat subsequently but till date the opposite party nos. 1 to 3 did not provide completion certificate and execute deed of conveyance in favour of complainant and thereafter the complainant sent a legal notice dt. 6.6.2018 upon the opposite parties with the request for execution and registration of deed of conveyance of the flat as per agreement for sale dt. 9^th March, 2009 and the opposite party nos. 5 to 9 reply vide one letter dt. 24.6.2018 for a meeting of settlement on 16^th July, 2018 but no one came to that meeting to determine complainant’s actual status and give consent for registration of the deed of conveyance in respect of the flat in question and thereafter the complainant further sent legal notice dt. 24.7.2018 upon the opposite parties with the request for execution and registration of deed of conveyance of the flat as per agreement for sale dt. 9^th March, 2009 but they did not respond to such legal notice and the cause of action arose on 9^th March, 2009 being the date of execution of agreement of sale and lastly on 6.6.2018 and 24.7.2018 being the date of legal notice and is continuing till date as the opposite parties did not execute deed of conveyance.

            Complainant filed the complaint petition praying direction upon the opposite parties to execute and register deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant as per agreement for sale dt. 9^th March, 2009 and to pay sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- for harassment, mental agony, financial loss and to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for litigation cost and to give any other relief or relieves as deem fit and proper.

Brief case of the opposite parties:           The opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 contest the case by filing written version denying inter-alia all the material allegations as leveled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case.

            The opposite party Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 9  by filing written version deny inter-alia all the material allegations as leveled against them. These opposite parties submit that the alleged agreement was allegedly executed on 9.11.2009 and the complainant has agitated his grievance after expiry of 9 years from the date of execution of the said agreement and the alleged agreement dt. 9.11.2009 was executed by and between the complainant and the developer being the opposite party nos. 1, 2 and 3 hereof in their personal capacity wherein the present answering opposite parties are neither the parties to the said agreement nor are the beneficiary of the alleged agreement for sale and in their legal notice dt. 24.6.2018 clarified their stand inter alia informing the complainant that they are always ready and willing to execute the registered deed of sale subject to payment of the full consideration amount of the flat in question as per the present market price since they have no knowledge about the alleged agreement dt. 9.11.2009 for which they proposed for meeting to settle the dispute on diverse junctures but in no occasion the complainant turned up and refused to show any document regarding the alleged liability of the present answering opposite parties hereof and thus they prayed for dismissal of the case.

            The complainant filed evidence on affidavit which is nothing but replica of complaint petition and supports the averments of the complaint petition and denial of the written version of the opposite parties.

            Complainant filed written notes of argument. The evidence on affidavit and written notes of argument as well in support of his case. Even after filing written version but the O.P nos. 1,2 &3 AND SEPARATE WRITTEN VERSION BY THE O.P NOS. 5,6,7 & 9 neither of them has dared to contest the case giving rise to the opportunity to hear the case ex parte.

            Argument advanced on behalf of the complainant heard at length.

            Following issues have been framed for disposal of this case.

Issues/points for consideration

1. Whether the complainant is the consumer as defined in the Consumer Protection Act?
2. Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the case?
3. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?

DECISIONS WITH REASONS

Issue No.1

In the light of the discussion hereinabove and from the materials on record, it transpires that the complainant is a Consumer as provided by the spirit of Section 2 (1) (d) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Issue No. 2

 Both the complainant and the opposite parties are residents/having their office addresses within the district of Hooghly and the total claim does not exceed the financial power of the commission, hence this issue is disposed of in the affirmative.

Issue Nos. 3 & 4

Both these issues are taken up simultaneously for disposal as these are interlinked.

It appears from the record that the petitioner has filed annexure 1 which is the photocopy of the agreement between the parties and the same discloses terms and conditions with regard to ownership of the flat measuring about 800 sq.ft ( approx). it further appears that the petitioner has filed copies of receipts about payment of consideration money for the flat(annexure 2).the possession letter dated 19/09/2011 (annexure 4) discloses delivery of possession of the flat ; also showing therein that the consideration for the said flat has been made clear on 19/09/2011

Much has been said vide annexure 6 about the legal notice in reply of the present petitioner on behalf of O.P nos. 4 to 9.The record also revealed that O.P nos. 1 to 3 have made allegations about failure of the petitioner to perform the duty on his part and have also made various allegations stating further in their written version that they are entitled to get near about Rs. 2,00,000/ from the complainant.

Giving a conscious consideration of the separate statements referred to hereinabove it appears surprising to note that neither of the O.Ps has dared to contest the case at the time of disposal of the petition of complaint.

Thus, it seems evident that the complainant is entitled to get the deed of conveyance registered and other reliefs as prayed for.

Both the issues are thus disposed of.

Hence,

ordered

that the complaint case no. 122 of 2018 be and the same is disposed of ex parte against all the O.Ps.

It is held that complainant is entitled to get an order directing opposite parties to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the property described in the schedule of the complaint petition within 60 days from passing of this order and complainant is also entitled to get compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and complainant is also entitled to get litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- from the opposite party nos. 1 to 3. The cost of registration is to be borne by the complainant.

           Opposite party nos. 1 to 3 are directed to comply and/ or carry out this order positively within 60 days otherwise complainant is given liberty to execute this order as per law.

            The opposite parties are also directed to pay and/ or deposit Rs. 5000/- in the Consumer Legal Aid Account of D.C.D.R.C., Hooghly which is to be utilized for the purpose of poor litigant public.

            Let a plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/ sent by ordinary post for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will be available in the following website www.confonet.nic.in.