ORDER

The present Revision Petitions have been filed under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the Impugned Orders dated 14.02.2017 passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as State Commission) in Appeal Nos. A/1093/2015 and A/1094/2015, whereby the State Commission has partly allowed the Appeals filed by the M/s. Sukalyani CIL Women Welfare Organisation and modified the Orders passed by the District Forum by which the Complaints filed by Prafulla Ranjan Das and Debashish Mandal (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Complainants’) were allowed by directing the Opposite Parties 1 to 4 to jointly and/or severally execute and register the Deed of Conveyance in favour of the Complainant and also to pay as compensation to the Complainant Rs.50,000/- for delayed delivery of possession, Rs.50,000/- for shortage in area of the flat, Rs.1,00,000/- for harassment and mental agony and Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost within 30 days from the date of the order, failing which the entire amount shall accrue interest @ 10% per annum for the entire period of default.

2. Since the facts and question of law involved in all these Revision Petitions are similar except for minor variation in the dates, these Revision Petitions are disposed off by this common Order. However, for the sake of convenience, RP No. 565 of 2017 is treated as the lead case and the facts enumerated hereinafter are taken from Complaint No. CC/527/12.

3. Succinctly put, the material facts, giving rise to filing of the Complaint are that Prafulla Ranjan Das (hereinafter referred to as the Complainant) was allotted a Flat No. N/1, admeasuring 1080 sq. ft. (super built up area), by M/s. Sukalyani CIL Women Welfare Organisation (hereinafter referred to as the Opposite Party Organisation) vide Allotment Agreement dated 31.01.2003. The Complainant paid a total consideration of Rs.12,96,000/- for the said flat @1200/- per sq. ft. It is alleged that the possession of the Flat was handed over to the Complainant on 31.01.2004. After taking possession on 31.01.2004, the Complainant alleged in the year 2005 that the area of the Flat is 970 sq. ft. instead of allotted 1080 sq. ft. super built up area. Vide letter dated 14.05.2005, the Complainant demanded adequate compensation, quantified at Rs.1,37,500/-, towards less area provided in the flat, from the Opposite Party Organisation but in vain. It was also averred that till the date of filing of the Complaint, the flat was not transferred and sale-deed was not executed in favour of the Complainant by the Opposite Party Organisation. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party Organisation, a Complaint was filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum seeking compensation of Rs.1,37,500/- for the shortfall of 110 sq. ft., Rs.1,00,000/- for delayed delivery of possession; Rs.1,00,000/- for the harassment and mental agony with direction to produce the building plan of the housing complex Sukalyani and direction to Asstt. Assessor-Collector Kolkata Municipal Corporation to produce the Inspection Book report of the Complainant’s Flat.

4. The Opposite Party Organisation contested the Complaint by filing written statement before the District Forum in which it was submitted that the allottees are well-versed about the Building Plan and gap between super built up area and built up area due to number of lifts (4), staircases (4), a broad passage between two rows of flats, rooms for generator, electrical installation, community hall and common facilities and the area utilized for these facilities was divided amongst the allottees proportionately according to the area of the respective flats. It was denied that there is any shortfall in the area. Regarding delay in registration of the flats they submitted that due to modification sought by some of the allottees the sale deed was finalized only in March 2006 and a Notice dated 10.03.2006