Sri Pawan Kr. Malpani,

son of Sri Ratanlal Malpani,

residing at 161/1, M.G. Road, 3^rd floor, Room no. 68,

Kolkata – 700007.---------------------------------------------------- COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.      Vivekand Constructions Ltd.

having its registered office

at 545, G.T. Road (  South ),

Howrah – 71101.

2.      Howrah Mills Company Ltd.,

having its registered office

at 135, Foreshore Road, P.S.  Shibpur,

District – Howrah,

PIN  – 711101.

3.      Mr. N.  Chatterjee,

IAS  Commissioner,

Howrah Municipal  Corporation,

4, Mahatma  Gandhi  Road,

Howrah – 711101.-------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                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 with respect to the schedule mentioned flat and to pay litigation costs as the o.ps. in violation of the agreement dated 16-09-2011 and in spite of receiving Rs. 7,57,800/- out of the total consideration of Rs. 19,80,000/- neither did deliver possession of the flat nor execute the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant. Hence the case.

2.               The o.p. nos. 1 & 2  in the written version contended interalia that the lease deed could not be executed for intervention of the Howrah Municipal Corporation with respect to several formalities

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 o.p. nos. 1 & 2 received Rs. 7,57,800/- from the complainant out of the total consideration of Rs. 19,80,000/- vide agreement dated 16-09-2011 for the schedule mentioned flat. For the intervention of the Howrah Municipal Corporation the o.ps. did not deliver the possession of the flat, nor did receive the balance consideration money. The internal dispute of the o.ps. cannot stand in the way of execution of the deed of conveyance otherwise the dream of the complainant shall be frustrated. The complainant cannot get identical flat at the price agreed upon. 

5.               Therefore, it 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. 414  of 2013 ( HDF 414  of 2013 )  be  and the same is allowed on contest with costs as against the o.p. nos. 1 & 2 and dismissed without costs against the o.p. n o. 3. 

      The O.P.  nos. 1 & 2  be directed to execute and register proper sale deed in favour of the complainant with respect to the schedule mentioned flat after receiving the balance amount within 30 days from the date of the order.

      The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 do pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant as litigation costs.

      No order as to compensation.

      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  )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F.,Howrah.