Date of Filing : 06.07.2022

Date of Judgement : 02.11.2023

Sri Sudip Niyogi, Hon’ble President

                                                               Brief Facts

Complainant had entered into a memorandum of agreement on 26/9/1994 with OP 2, the proprietor of OP 1 (developer) for purchasing one self-contained flat on the first floor east-north corner, measuring about 600sq.ft. at Premises No. 422 Garfa Main Road, Kasba, Kolkata 700 075 at a consideration of Rs.1,98,000/-.  The entire amount of consideration was paid to OP 2 following the said agreement.  Subsequently, the flat was also delivered to the complainant, but no deed of conveyance was executed and registered in favour of the complainant though he had paid Rs.1,97,493/- and Rs.30,000/- towards registration fee which he claimed to have been subsequently refunded.  So, the complainant prayed for a direction upon the OPs for execution and registration of the deed of conveyance, compensation etc.  OPs did not appear and contest the case, so it was heard exparte against them. 

So, the point for consideration is, whether the complainant is entitled to any relief(s).

                                                              FINDINGS

On the prayer of the complainant, the petition of complaint was treated as evidence on his behalf.  Besides that, he also produced several documents namely – memorandum of agreement dt. 26/9/1994, money receipts showing payment of consideration to OP 1 developer, one copy of a draft deed of conveyance.  According to complainant, one date for execution of the deed of conveyance was fixed, but ultimately that was not done by the OPs.  However, complainant produced one possession letter, annexure `B’ showing that the possession of the scheduled flat was delivered to the complainant by the developer on 2/8/1996.  So, the materials on record revealed that though possession of the scheduled flat was delivered to the complainant long back, the execution of the deed of conveyance remained elusive till date.

Be it noted here that, in the petition of complaint, complainant prayed for a direction upon the OPs to pay Rs.2,27,293/- on account of payment of stamp duty and Rs.30,000/- for cost of registration with interest from 26/7/1994.  But, in the petition of complaint itself, complainant claimed that the said amount was refunded by the OP.  Apart from this, no document was produced to show that the said amount was paid by the complainant.  So, that prayer cannot be entertained.

However, complainant is entitled to a deed of conveyance being executed and registered in his favour.  Complainant is also entitled to cost of litigation.

Accordingly, it is

                                                ORDERED

That the instant case CC/388/2022 is allowed exparte against the OPs.

OPs are directed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in respect of the complainant in respect of the scheduled flat. The entire cost of execution and registration of the flat to be borne by the complainant.

OP 1 & 2 also to pay Rs.5000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant.

OPs are directed to comply with this order within 45 days from the date of this order, failing which, the complainant shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

Dictated and corrected by me

President