REINA BANERJEE Vs. ALOKE GANGULY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. C. Case Nos.538/o/1994 and 539/o/1994 are heard together because common questions of fact and law are involved.

(2.) Smt. Reina Banerjee is the complainant in Case No.538/o/1994. She has brought this action against the opposite party who were three in number with the following allegations.

(3.) Opposite party No.2 is the owner of the land whereas opposite party No.1 is the promoter. Both of them have entered into an agreement for the development of the land by construction of a multi-storeyed building on 28.8.1992. It was stipulated in the agreement that the building would be raised as per plan santioned by the Municipal Corporation and self contained flats will be sold to intending purchasers. In pursuance of the said agreement opposite party No.2 executed a Power of Attorney in favour of opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.1 thereupon started construction of the multi-storeyed building and invited offers from prospective buyers. The petitioners approached opposite party No.1 through her husband for purchase of a suitable flat on the 2nd floor of the said premises comprising an area of 1,310 sq. ft. of super built area in the said building. The price of the said flat was fixed at Rs.6,50,000/-. Thereupon, the petitioner made payment of Rs.1,00,000/- as earnest money towards part payment of the said consideration. Opposite party No.1 agreed to deliver possession of the said flat by May, 1993. Opposite party No.1 upon proceeding with the construction insisted on further payment of consideration money and the petitioner paid a total sum of Rs.6,20,000/- by various instalments on taking loan from the Housing Development Finance Corporation. The opposite party No.1 failed and neglected to complete the building and to deliver possession of the same to the petitioner though he promised to deliver possession thereof by the second week of January, 1994. Subsequently, in the latter part of October, 1994 the petitioner for the first time came to learn that opposite party No.1 has entered into an agreement with opposite party No.3 for absolute sale of entire multi-storeyed building suppressing the pre-existing agreement for sale of the flat in her favour. She also came to learn that opposite party No.1 had entered into similar agreement for sale in respect of self-contained flat to one Sri Gautam Bose. Consequently the petitioner and the said Sri Gautam Bose lodged a complaint with the police.