ORDER

Final Order/Judgment

HON’BLE ANANDA KUMAR TIWARI

(JUDICIAL MEMBER)

The complainants filed this case under the provision of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to Act of 1986) against the Opposite Parties stating that the Ops were joint owners and co-owners in respect of the piece and parcel of land being premises No 48/3, Gariahat Road, P.S. Gariahat, Kolkata-700019 and intended to develop/construct said piece of land by constructing a multi storied building with residential flat and floor area. It is stated that the Ops were represented by OP no. 12 by virtue of a power of attorney to construct multi storied building and procuring intending purchasers. It is stated that the OP no. 12 floated invitation to the intending purchaser and the complainants alongwith one Mr. Bhagabati Prasad Bazaz (since deceased) approached the OP no. 12 with intention to purchase a flat and being satisfied,booked a flat being the apartment no S-4-C, 4 floor, South block of holding no. 48/3, Gariahat Road, P.S. Gariahat, Kolkata-700019 having a covered area measuring about 1805 sq. ft. For a total consideration amount of Rs. 9,02,500/-.

It is stated that it was agreed between the parties that the parties will execute an agreement wherein the OPs through their attorney and OP No 12 Usha Singhi firstly transfer undivided proportionate land in respect of the said unit in favour of the complainants alongwith Mr. Bhagabati Prasad Bazaz at a consideration of Rs. 2,25,625/- and thereafter shall further execute a construction agreement at a total value of Rs. 6,76,875/-. According to the said terms and conditions the parties herein executed two agreements, one agreement of sale and another agreement for construction both the executed on 4 day of January, 1994.

According to the complainants thereafter they paid full consideration amount and the OP no. 12 after completion of the construction work handed over the possession of the said Flat to the complainants as per their satisfaction but due to the latches on the part of the Ops, the flat could not be registered in the name of the complainants and subsequently Bhagabati Prasad Bazaz expired on 24/06/2018 thereby leaving his legal heirs, the present complainants being his son and wife respectively.

It is the further case of the complainants that several time they requested the OPs to make arrangement for causing registration of the said Flat in the name of the complainants but the OP no. 12 kept silence and did not comply and as such the finally on 25/09/2018 the complainants sent one advocate notice to the OP no.12 asking her to make arrangement for the registration of the flat but it was not complied.

Contending the above and other facts stated in the petition of compliant and stating that the cause of action first arose on 04/01/1994 and is continuing and lastly it arose on 25/09/2018, the complainants prayed for a direction upon the OPs to register said flat in favour of the complainant as well as for compensation and litigation cost.

After filing of the case and its admission, notice was issued to the OPs but only OP no. 5 and 12 appeared by filing Vakalatnama and contested the case. The Ops Nos 5 and 12 filed Written Version and the case proceeded ex-parte against the other OPs. The complainants filed their evidence and also replied to the questionnaire filed by OP nos. 5 and 12. The OP nos. 5 and 12 prayed to treat their Written Version as evidence and filed reply to the questionnaire of the complainants. The parties filed BNA and the arguments of both sides were heard.

In the Written Version filed by the OP no. 5 and 12 it is stated that the OP no. 12 entered into an agreement for sale and construction for self and all other co-owners of the property and as many as 65 sale/conveyance deedswere executed. It is stated that there