The complainant Smt. Paromita Das Gupta, a house wife, resident of Imambari lane, P.S- English Bazar with her other family member signed an agreement for construction of multi-storied building on the land inherited by her along with other surviving legal heirs of her father since deceased Subhas Chandra Neogi with OP Kishore Saha. The OP himself claimed a successful businessman in the field of real-estate in Malda Town.
As per agreement complainant is entitled to get 525 sq. ft. carpet area flat consisting of two bedrooms, one kitchen two toilets cum bathrooms , one balcony , one prayer room at the 2nd floor of the multi-storied building within 30 months. An amount of Rs.1,75,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Seventy – Five thousand only) shall handed over to the complainant by the Opposite Party. That after elapse of one year Opposite Party issued a cheque in favour of the complainant amounting Rs.1,00,00/- (Rupees One Lakh). That Opposite Party after payment of Rs.1,00,000/- started to irritate complainant , so that she may compel to return the Rs. 1,00,000/- to him. That the complainant been through inexplicable mental torture by the Opposite Party, as Opposite Party wanted to get back the portion of amounting i.e. Rs. 1,00000/- paid by him as per stipulation delineated in the agreement. That the complainant unable to brook the mental torture inflicted on her by the Opposite Party ergo returned Rs. 1,00,000/- That in the year 2019 complainant came to see her flat , but found that nothing was constructed for her as assured by the opposite party.
That finding no other alternative complainant filed written compliant before AD, CA & FBP Malda R.O. In the final session OP did not turned up before the Ld. Mediator. That finding no other alternative the complainant filed written complainant before this commission and prays for an order directing OP to transfer the possession as well owner ship of the flat in favour of complainant or an order directing OP to pay complainant Rs. 38,20,000/- with interest 7% and Rs, 5 ,00,000/- for negligence and Rs. 3,00,000/-for mental agony and harassment Rs. 2,00,000/- for litigation cost and any other relief.
:: Decision with reasons ::
Points to be decided whether there any deficiency in service by OP?
This commission carefully perused the complaint petition and evidence in writing by the complainant and PW2 and also perused the agreement. Now admitted position having properly summoned to OP. the OP did not turn up before this commission. Hence the Case runs expert against OP vide order No. 9 dated 29.09.24. Consequently on perusal of aforesaid documents relaying on the unchallenged evidence this commission has no alternative but to hold that there is deficiency in service on the part of OP to the complainant and complainant thereby is entitled to get relief as asked for in moderate manner.
Hence Ordered,
that the complainant petition be a same with a allowed with a direction to OP to pay complainant Rs.38,00,000/-@ 3% interest from the date of final order and Rs. 15,000/- for negligence, unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, Rs. 10,000/- for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 10,000/- for litigation cost within 45 days from this order. Complainant is at liberty to put an execution of the final order of this commission as provision of CP Act 2019.
Let a copy of order they supplied to the parties free of cost.
