SAURAV SANYAL Vs. RUSSEL ESTATES CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Mr. Saurabh Suman Sinha, Learned Counsel for the Complainants and perused the averments made in the Complaints as also various documents filed along with the Complaints.

(2.) Opposite Party No.1 has been directed to proceed ex-parte vide order dated 19.09.2017 and Opposite Party No.2 has been deleted vide order dated 22.10.2018.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Complainants invited our attention to various reliefs claimed in the Complaints and submitted that in terms of the Agreement dated 06.02.2015, entered into between the Complainants and Opposite Party No.1, it was specifically mentioned in Clause-5 of the Agreement that the possession of the flats in question would be handed over to the Complainants on 'as is where is basis' in a vacant possession free from all encumbrances to finish certain interior/internal works at the cost of the Complainants. However, under Clause-8, it was provided that the Complainants would be liable to meet all outgoings in respect of the said premises, including taxes, repairs, upkeep of the premises etc. According to the letter of intimation dated 03.05.2016 issued by Kolkata Municipal Corporation, filed as part of Annexure-8, details of property tax for various periods have been given.