Dt. of filing- 10/04/2018
Dt. of Judgement- 18/10/2019
Mrs. Sashi Kala Basu, Hon’ble President.
This complaint is filed by Neeraj Dhawan under Section 12 read with Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Opposite Party namely Golden Point Landcon Private Limited being represented by its Director Mr. Sabir Pailan and Dipankar Naskar, alleging deficiency in service.
Case of the complainant in short is that complainant agreed to purchase plots of land from the Opposite Party and has paid a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- for Plot no. 409 having an area of 2 cottahas and has further paid a sum of Rs. 5,62,000/- for Plot No. 734 measuring about 2 cottahas 8 chittaks. Inspite of several requests, OPs have failed and neglected to execute proper indenture in favour of the complainant. OPs however assured that they would execute indenture in respect of the said two plots. On 03.08.2017, complainant requested the Directors of the OP to register the land in his favour. But they paid no heed. Again on 27.03.2018, OPs refused to execute the deed of conveyance in respect of the said plots. OPs have not developed the said project and have not completed the work within the stipulated period. So, the present case has been filed by the complainant praying to direct the OP to execute and register the deed of conveyance and in the event of failure, to refund the entire money paid by the complainant, to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-, Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental pain and agony and Rs. 50,000/- towards the litigation cost.
Complainant has annexed with the complaint petition. Copy of the receipts showing payment of the amount to the OP and a copy of the acknowledgment regarding receipt of the money issued by one Saugat Jana.
On perusal of the record it appears that in inspite of the service of notice , OP did not file any Written Version. However, on 06.08.2018, OP entered appearance and filed a petition for allowing the OP to participate in the argument.
So, point requires determination is –
Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for ?
Decision with reasons
Admittedly, no agreement for sale has been executed by and between the parties. But in support of his claim that he paid the amount towards the purchase of Plot no. 409 and Plot no.734, complainant has filed the money receipts issued by the OP. It further appears that a joint petition along with a M.O.U. has been filed wherein it was settled between both parties that OP shall pay a sum of Rs. 12,00,000/- as full and final settlement to the complainant, within 6 months from the date of execution of the said M.O.U. So the said document also substantiate the claim of the complainant about OP agreeing to sell the plot being numbered 409 and 734 as claimed by the complainant and the payment of sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- and Rs. 5,62,000/- respectively to the OP. As it is apparent that neither the plots have been handed over to the complainant nor the money paid by him has been refunded, complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed by him regarding delivery of possession and execution of the deed. In alternatively to refund the money along with interest. However, since the interest has been allowed, we find no justification to allow compensation as prayed.
Hence.
Ordered
CC/184/2018 is allowed exparte. Opposite Party is directed to deliver the possession and execute the deed of conveyance in respect of plots described in the schedule of the complaint within two months from the date of this order. In alternatively , Opposite Party is directed to refund Rs. 4,00,000/- and Rs. 5,62,000/- totalling Rs. 9,62,000/- along with interest @ 18% from the date of last payment i.e. 14.06.2014 to till this date, within the aforesaid period of two months. OP is also directed to pay litigation cost of Rs. 12,000/- within the aforesaid period of two months in default the entire sum shall carry interest @ 12% till realisation.
