GOKUL PROPERTIES Vs. PRADIP KUMAR BAGCHI & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this First Appeal, filed by the M/s Gokul Properties, under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the "Act") is to the order dated 01.08.2017 passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (for short "the State Commission.") in CC No. CC/203/2017.

(2.) By the impugned order, the State Commission has allowed the Complaint on contest against the first and second Opposite Parties, jointly and severally, and directed them to execute the Sale Deed of the subject property in favour of the Complainant within 30 days after payment of Rs. 6,29,790/- towards balance consideration by the Complainant in favour of the first Opposite Party. The first Opposite Party was also directed to make payment of compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with litigation costs of Rs. 10,000/- totalling Rs. 1,10,000/- in favour of the Complainant within 30 days from the date of the order otherwise it would carry interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of order till compliance of the same.

(3.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 16.06.2006 the Complainant entered into a registered Agreement for Sale with the first Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as "the Developer") and second Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as "the Landlord") to purchase a self-contained flat measuring 711 sq. ft. super built-up area on the 3rd floor of the building commonly known as "Mangaldeep" along with one open undemarcated car parking space on the ground floor and proportionate share in land at Premises No. 64/68/1, Khudiram Bose Sarani, Kolkata for a total consideration of Rs. 10,30,950/- @ Rs. 1,450/- per sq. ft. of the flat +cost of roof garden of Rs. 30,000/- + Rs. 80,000/- for car parking space aggregating to a sum of Rs. 11,48,950/-. For making the payment of the said consideration the Complainant took housing loan from the 3rd Opposite Party Bank of Baroda (for short "the Bank") against the mortgage of the flat in question and upon confirmation by the office of the Complainant i.e. Air India for the sanctioned amount of Rs. 9 lacs, the Promoter directly received the amount of Rs. 7,99,160/- from the said Bank. It is stated that in spite of making the payment of the entire amount to the tune of Rs. 11,48,950/- as per the Terms of the Agreement, the Opposite Parties did not proceed either to complete the construction of the flat or to deliver the same to the Complainant. It is stated that since the construction remained incomplete and the pressure was mounted against the Complainant for accommodation, the Developer agreed that he would take all responsibility of the entire loan amount of the bank and he would return the same to the Bank on behalf of the Complainant after taking back the flat from the Complainant. By such understanding, the Developer initially returned Rs. 2,10,000/- but thereafter did not pay any amount and as such the settlement did not materialize and thus the Developer grabbed the rest of the amount to the tune of Rs. 7,27,000/-. It is further stated that in spite of repeated reminders, the Developer did not proceed in the matter and had left the building in a half-done condition i.e. after completing 90% of the job. The Developer did not pay any heed to the request of the Complainant either to deliver the flat or to complete execution of the registration. It is stated that the Developer informed him that the Landlord was not ready to deliver the flat or to register the Deed of Conveyance. It is stated that the Complainant is paying interest to the Bank since 2006 without enjoying the property.