RAJIV KUMAR JAIN Vs. SHYAM KANHIYA JAISWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Opposite Party No.1 against the Respondents/Complainants and Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 challenging the impugned Order dtd. 12/3/2018 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata, West Bengal, in Complaint Case bearing No. CC/ 183/ 2016. Vide such Order, the State Commission had disposed off the Complaint against Opposite Party No. 1 on contest and Ex-parte against Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the Opposite Party No.2 is the land owner of Premises No. 41C, Bechu Chatterjee Street under Amherst Street Police Station, Kolkata ' 700009, whereas the Opposite Party No.3 is her husband and her constituted agent and attorney with regard to the aforesaid property. The Opposite Party No.1 is a developer who entered into a Development Agreement with regard to construction and development of a new building Project on the aforesaid premises. The Complainants had entered into an Agreement for Sale dtd. 25/1/2014 with the Opposite Party No.1 ' Developer to purchase one Flat being the Flat D situated on the second floor (north-eastern side) of the building measuring 1200 sq. ft., and a covered parking area at the aforesaid premises, but for a typographical error, open car parking space had been mentioned in place of covered parking area. The total consideration of the Flat was Rs.62,40,000.00 out of which Rs.31,00,000.00 had been contended to be paid by the Complainants. The Complainants also served a Legal Notice dtd. 18/9/2014 on the Opposite Party No.1 for specific performance of the Agreement for Sale dtd. 25/1/2014. Thereafter, on 26/11/2014, the Complainant No.1 visited the premises and found that the Opposite Party No.1 was giving inspection to some strangers for an unlawful transfer of the Complainants' Flat. In order to prevent the Opposite Party No.1 from creating third party interests in the Flat as well as the covered parking space, the Complainants filed a Suit bearing TS No. 35504 of 2014 against the Opposite Parties before Ld. 10th judge of City Civil Court at Calcutta wherein the Complainants also moved an Application under Order 39 Rules 1&2 r/w Sec. 151 of the Civil Procedure Code wherein the Ld. 10th Judge had directed the Complainants to pay a sum of Rs.10.00 Lacs to the Opposite Parties which was complied with by the Complainants. The Ld. Judge had allowed the Application for injunction vide Order dtd. 8/10/2015 restraining the Opposite Parties from creating any third party interests in the suit Flat including the covered car parking space till the disposal of the suit. The said suit was still pending till the date of filing of the Complaint. Therefore, the Complainants had contended to have paid a total sum of Rs.41,00,000.00 to the Opposite Parties.

(3.) Thereafter, the Complainants issued a Notice to the Opposite Party for filing of the Complaint before the Ld. State Commission in case the Opposite Party failed to refund the sum paid. However, the Opposite Party failed to comply with the aforesaid notice. Therefore, being aggrieved by the acts of the Opposite Parties in failing to comply their part of obligations resulting deficiency in services and unfair trade practices, the Complainants filed a Complaint before the Ld. State Commission seeking refund of Rs.41,00,000.00 along with interest @ 18%p.a. from 25/1/2016 till realization, compensation of Rs.20,00,000.00, pendente lite interest @ 18% p.a. during the pendency of the case and interest @ 18%p.a. on judgement/ order till realization.