| Complaint Case No. CC/133/2022 | | ( Date of Filing : 21 Sep 2022 ) |
| | | | 1. Anamita Saha | | W/o, Lt Amiya Baran Saha. 125B, Meghnad Saha Sarani, Kolkata- 700 027. | | 2. Aneek Saha | | S/o, Lt Amiya Baran Saha. 125B, Meghnad Saha Sarani, Kolkata- 700 027. |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. The Chairman, M/s. Anant Raj Ltd. | | Anant Raj Estate, Plot No.- CP-1, Sector- 8, IMT Maneswar, Haryana, Pin- 122 051. | | 2. The Director | | Plot No.- CP-1, Sector- 8, IMT Maneswar, Haryana, Pin- 122 051. | | 3. Navneet Singh Bhatia | | S/o, Lt Kalyan Singh. L-529, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi, Pin- 110 076. | | 4. Priya Bhalla, CRM Department, M/S Anant Raj Ltd. | | Plot No.- CP-1, Sector- 8, IMT Maneswar, Haryana, Pin- 122 051. | | 5. Varun Khullar, M/S Anant Raj Ltd. | | Plot No.- CP-1, Sector- 8, IMT Maneswar, Haryana, Pin- 122 051.
|
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL, PRESIDENT
The instant complaint under section 47 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ( in short ‘the Act’) is at the instance of the complainants against the Developers, Builders on the allegation of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties for a consumer dispute of housing construction. The complainants have filed the complaint case praying for the following reliefs :-
“i) To direct the respondents to refund an amount of Rs.70,00,000/- (Rupees seventy lakh) only.
ii) A cost of the litigation.
iii) A penal interest of 12% per annum.
iv) An attachment of the property.
v) Any other relief/s as your Honour may deem fit and proper.”
- Heard the Learned Advocate appearing for the complainants on the point of admission at length and in full.
- Perused the record including the petition of complaint and its Annexures. Considered.
- Having heard the Learned Advocate appearing for the complainants and on perusal of the record it appears to us that on 20th September, 2014 Late Amiya Baran Saha, father of the complainant No. 1 and complainant No. 2 entered into a ‘Floor Buyer Agreement’ with Anant Raj Ltd. for purchasing the Unit No. 25, First Floor, Independent Floor, Pocket ‘E’, measuring 1971 sq. ft. in project namely the ‘Anant Raj Ltd.’ for a total cost of Rs.1,73,51,069 /- vide Application No. 1518.
- On bare perusal of the copy of the said ‘Floor Buyer Agreement’ it appears to us that there was time limit of 36 months from the date of execution of this ‘Floor Buyer Agreement’ with a grace period of six months (“Tentative Handover Date”).
- It also appears from the said agreement that there is no clause in such contract for termination of the agreement by the complainants on any ground. In fact, clause No. 6.26 in running page of 29 of the contract at hand provides that the buyer shall not be entitled to cancel or terminate this ‘Floor Buyer Agreement’ in any circumstances whatsoever. As such, it appears to us that the complainant has no authority to terminate the contract or pray for termination of the contract as the same is against the terms of the very contract on the basis of which the complainant has come before this Commission.
- The complainants have also failed to show any document that they were eager to take possession, registration of the said flat and they have requested M/s. Anant Raj Ltd. for execution of the sale deed on payment of full consideration amount within a stipulated time or thereafter. Rather it proves from the copy of Gmail dated 18/08/2021 and 19/08/2021 that the complainants prayed for time on several occasions for making arrangement to take possession of the flat and to pay their remaining dues.
- In such a situation, we are of the view that this Commission cannot pass any order which will be against the terms of t
| |
Back
