IMPORTANT POINT
State Commission should not pass any order without giving finding on all the points raised.

M. Shreesha, Member—Challenge in this First Appeal under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the “Act”) is to the order dated 10.04.2017 passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, (for short “the State Commission.”) in CC No. SC/07/O/2007.

2. By the impugned order, the State Commission has allowed the Complaint and directed the First and Second Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- in lieu of the subject property within a period of 60 days from the date of order failing which it would carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of order till its full realization. The State Commission had also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation and an equal amount towards costs to be payable within 30 days from the date of order, in default the said amount would also carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of order till realization.

3. Succinctly put, the facts of the case are that Mr. Pandav Roy and his father Mr. Partha Roy (hereinafter referred to as “the Complainants”) had entered into an Agreement on 01.05.2003 with Merlin Projects Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “the First Opposite Party”) to purchase a Row House measuring 3 cottahas having a total constructed area of 1380 sq. ft. bearing No. B-15 in the Complex titled “The Tarrace” at Merlin Greens situated at Mouza Kriparampur, P.S. Bishnupur, District South 24 Parganas at a total consideration of Rs.14,25,000/-. They paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the First Opposite Party towards earnest money vide cheque no. 745541 dated 01.05.2003 drawn on Bank of Baroda. Thereafter a Supplementary Agreement was also executed between the parties on the same day i.e. on 01.05.2003 regarding maintaining of Corpus Fund. The Complainants later on also paid the balance amount of earnest money to the tune of Rs.1,93,750/- and thus paid a total sum of Rs.2,43,750/- towards full and final settlement of earnest money which was duly reflected in the Tripartite Agreement between the parties executed on 21.01.2004. It was stated that the Complainants had approached Third Opposite Party Bank i.e. Union Bank of India for obtaining a House Building Loan of Rs.15,00,000/- which was duly sanctioned and Third Opposite Party Bank released a sum of Rs.13,81,250/- to the First Opposite Party out of the sanctioned loan amount of Rs.15,00,000/- keeping a sum of Rs.1,18,750/- for the purpose of registration of Deed of Conveyance. Thus the First Opposite Party received a total sum of Rs.16,25,000/- out of which Rs.14,25,000/- was consideration money and Rs.2,00,000/- was towards contribution in the Corpus Fund. The Complainants were put in possession on 20.04.2004 and the Opposite Parties provided facilities such as water supply, electricity, generator service and security. On 30.06.2004, the second Complainant requested the Opposite Parties to get the Deed of Conveyance duly registered in their favour but the same had not been done. It was stated that the Opposite Parties despite receipt of entire consideration amount and also Rs.2,00,000/- towards contribution to the Corpus Fund did not execute the Sale Deed. Subsequently, by letter dated 23.10.2006, second Opposite Party informed the Complainants that since they had failed to fulfil their financial obligation, in as much as the cheque of Rs.1,93,750/- had been dishonoured twice and they had also defaulted in payment of instalments to the Bank, the Deed of Agreement dated 01.05.2003 had been cancelled and they were being treated as trespassers. Complainants were asked to vacate the subject premises. As all the basic facilities had been withdrawn, the Complainants were compelled to shift from the said premises on 23.10.2006. The first Complainant replied vide letter dated 30.10.2006 to the effect that total consideration money had already been paid to the Opposite Parties and thereafter they were given possession of the subject premises. It was stated that the first Opposite Party had tak