WEST BENGAL STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLKATA
Samiksha Bhattacharya, Presiding Member
Arabinda Das Gupta and Anr. – Complainants
versus
Debabrata Ghosh – Opp. Party
Complaint Case No.CC/573 of 2017
Decided on 14.1.2022
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – S. 17(1)(a)(i) [Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – S. 47(1)(a)(i)] – Services – Delay in completion of Work by Developer – Two flat owners/complainants filed the instant case for common interest but they had not filed any petition under 12(1)(c) of the CP Act, 1986 “ Whether Complaints have properly being instituted “ All the grievances mentioned in the petition of complaint are of common interest. The prayer of due electricity bill and the corporation bill, if proved, to be paid to all the owners by the OP “ This issue cannot be agitated in the complaint filed by two flat owners only “ Therefore, in this premises the Commission cannot assess that at what extend works are pending and unfinished. The important question is when the grievances are related to common interest, then complaint case must be filed in proper manner. Therefore, this Commission cannot give any direction to the OP to complete the unfinished works. Without appointing any Commissioner for inspecting the premises, the Commission cannot take any decision on the basis of averments stated in the petition of complaint. [Para 5]
JUDGMENT
Samiksha Bhattacharya, Presiding Member.—The instant complaint case has been filed Under Section 17(1)(a)(i) of CP Act 1986 alleging deficiency in service against the OP.
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that both the complainants are the owner of two separate flats at premises No 12/1, Sitaram Road, Banshdroni, P.S. Regent Park, Kolkata – 700 070. The Complainant No. 1 together with his son Mr Anish Das Gupta purchased one flat being No. A-3 on the 3rd floor and one car parking space on the ground floor vide deed of conveyance dated 16.05.2016 registered in the office of the ADSR at Alipore 24 Parganas(South). The Complainant No. 2 together with his wife Mrs. Sneha Bose Raha purchased one flat being No. A-1 on the first floor and one car parking space on the ground floor at the same premises vide deed of conveyance dated 25.05.2016 which is registered in the office of the ADSR at Alipore, 24 Parganas(South). As per the agreement OP had agreed and accepted the whole work at the aforesaid premises within February, 2016 and also agreed to provide the completion certificate from the competent authority after completion of work but till date OP neither completed the works as per agreement for sale nor provided the completion certificate to the present complaints or any resident of the said premises. Complainants have alleged the list of works which are mentioned in the petition of complaint which are not finished till date by the OP. After registration the complainants contacted the OP over phone on several occasions but till date the said pending work has not been started and finally on 11.05.2017 complainants send a legal notice through their Advocate demanding to comply the pending works as stated in the Paragraph-5 of the petition of complaint alongwith Rs. 3,27,000/- being outstanding electricity bill and Rs. 23,276/- for outstanding bill with compensation. In spite of the receiving of the said demand notice the OP neither completed the pending work nor paid the outstanding amount to the complainants. Since the Complainants No. 1 is a senior citizen and residing at the 3rd floor it is very difficult to move without lift. Since the grievances have not been solved by the OP, therefore, the complainants have filed the instant petition of complainant praying for direction upon OP to pay the sum of Rs. 2,62,000/- being outstanding electricity bill of Rs. 23,276/- for outstanding corporation bill with interest and compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/- as assessed by the complainants for doing of the said works in present time a further awarded a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment and loss incurred.
3. The sole OP contested the case by filing written version. In his written version the OP denied of material allegations inter-alia stated that the agreement for sale and deed of conveyance was signed and executed between the developer and the complainant namely Arabindo Das Gupta alongwith his son Anish Das Gupta. But the complainant No. 1 at the time of filing of this complaint did not make the said Anish Dasgupta as the party and did not make the landlords as party in the instant proceeding. Complainant No. 2 also entered into the sale agreement with his wife Smt. Sneha Bose Raha and accordingly the deed of conveyance was executed and registered in between the developer and the complainant No. 2 with this wife Smt. Sneha Bose Raha but the complainant No. 2 has not made Smt. Sneha Bose Raha as party. As per clause of the agreement for sale all the parties should be bound by the agreement and it is clearly stated that the developer shall not provide completion certificate of the building and the purchasers/complainants shall not demand and/or claim any completion certificate from the developer/OP. The OP further stated that lift has already been installed and running successfully. The construction of caretaker room also constructed by the developer, rain water pipe from the roof of the building of t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.