JUDGMENT

Manojit Mandal, President.—This complaint case under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed against the opposite parties praying for the following reliefs:—

“a) For an order directing the opposite parties to complete and/or perform the registration in respect of the said Unit No. B Upper Comprised in Third and Fourth floors of the Block No. DN-02 having a total super built up area of 2326 square feet more or less. Right to park one car at the demarcated space on the spaces located in the front side ground floor and also together with one servants’ quarter. User right of the Roof/Terrace of 767 square feet, under Police Station – Rajarhat, in the district of 24 Parganas North in accordance with the transfer of the right, title and interest of and in terms of the schedule –II of the agreement for sale in respect of the said Unit No.-B of the same morefully and particularly described in schedule ‘B’ herein below written Unto and to the favour of the complainant.

b) From order of permanent injunction restraining the opposite parties their such men and / or agents from creating any third party interest and / or alienating and / or assigning, and / or transferring and / or selling the said schedule ‘B’ herein below in any manner whatsoever to any third party, without the consent of the complainants.

c) For an order of declaration that the complainants / petitioners are entitled to the service as has been committed and / or assured to be rendered in terms of the schedule-II in respect of the agreement for sale of the said Unit No.-B by the opposite parties in respect of the registration and execution of the Deed of sale in regard to and in accordance with the right of transfer and / or sale of the said Unit No.-B described in the Schedule ‘B’ herein below written in terms of the prayer (a).

d) For an order directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) only as and by way of compensation as claimed, to the complainant / petitioner.

e) For all costs and advocate’s fees of the litigation as awarded suitably.

f) For other / further relief and / or reliefs the complainant / petitioner is entitled to in law and equity by this Learned Forum.”

2. During the pendency of the case the complainant No. 1 Rajesh Kumar Gupta passed away. After the death of Rajesh Kumar Gupta his sons namely Harsh Gupta and Manthan Gupta were substituted.

3. Briefly stated the complaint case, in short, are that the complainants were looking for an accommodation and desirous to purchase a Duplex Flat / Unit for their family in a good locality and in such circumstances, the complainants met the opposite parties and expressed their desire to purchase a Duplex Flat / Unit. The opposite parties made negotiation with the complainants whereby the opposite parties covenanted declared and agreed to sell of ALL THAT unit at ‘Duplex Natura’, Unit No. ‘B’ upper comprised in 3rd and 4th floors of the Block No. DN-02 having a total super built up area of 2326 sq. ft. more or less under P.S. Rajarhat in the district of North 24 Parganas.

4. Further case of the complainants are that the opposite parties represented themselves as a owner / developer and having a good reputation and goodwill in regard to and in accordance with the construction company and were honest in their dealings and as such there was no possibility of the complainants being duped in any manner whatsoever.

5. Further case of the complainants are that the opposite parties assured the complainants that the sale for the unit being sale of ALL THAT unit at ‘Duplex Natura’, Unit No. ‘B’ at a consideration of Rs.64,43,200/- (Rupees sixty four lakh forty three thousand and two hundred only). Out of the said consideration amount the complainants paid a sum of Rs.62,57,815/- (Rupees sixty two lakh fifty seven thousand eight hundred and fifteen only) to the opposite parties on different dates by obtaining the valid money receipt from the opposi