2024 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 1425
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
FIRST APPEAL NO. 183 OF 2024
(Against the Order dated 29/01/2024 in Complaint No. CC/363/2018 of the State Commission West Bengal)
1. M/ S. SAMRIDDHI CCNSTRUCTION
HAVING IT'S OFFICE
AT 371, CHAK GARIA. SREE NAGAR MAIN
ROAD, P.S. PANCHASAYAR. DISTT. 24-PARGANAS, KOLKATA-700094, WEST BENGAL
2. SRI BIVAS PRADHAN SON OF KANGAL CHANDRA PRA.DHAN
R/O. 371. CHAK GARIA. SREE NAGAR MAIN ROAD,
P.S. PANCHAEAYAR. KOLKATA-700094, 24-PARGANAS, WEST BENGAL
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SMT. RUPA SARKAR WIFE OF SRI DEBASIS SARKAR
RESIDING AT 13. AVENUE SOUTH, 1ST FLOOR.
KOLKATA-700075,P.S. SURVEY PARK, 24-PARGANAS, WEST BENGAL
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
 
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA,PRESIDING MEMBER
HON'BLE BHARATKUMAR PANDYA,MEMBER
FOR THE APPELLANT :
MR. PRASANTHA BANERJEE, ADVOCATE
Dated : 09 July 2024
For the Petitioner: MR. PRASANTA BANERJEE
For the Respondent:
ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Prasantha Banerjee, Advocate for the appellants.
2. Above appeal has been filed against the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission West Bengal, Kolkata dated 29.01.2024, allowing the complaint filed by the respondent and directing the appellants to handover complete flat as per first and second schedule of the development agreement dated 30.05.2014 and also to pay balance amount of Rs.100000/- to the complainants with simple interest @ 9% per annum from 06.03.2018 till the date of payment and Rs.200000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment with litigation cost of Rs.10000/-.
3. The office has submitted report that there is a delay of 12 days in filing the appeal. The appellants have filed an application for condonation of delay IA/3894/2024. In the interest of justice, delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
4. Smt. Rupa Sarkar (the respondent) filed consumer complaint No.363 of 2018 with the State Commission for directing the opposite parties to (a) complete the unfinished works as per agreement alongwith completion certificate, permission of drainage, sewerage and water facilities; (b) handover the vacant possession of owner’s allocation of building at 121/1, Chak Garia, Kolkata-700094, P.S. Panchasayar with all amenities and privileges; (c) pay remaining cash consideration of Rs.100000/- with interest @ 18% from the date of delivery of possession; (d) pay compensation of Rs.4/- lacs; (e) pay litigation cost of Rs.50000/-; and (f) any other order which this Commission deems fit and proper.
5. The complainant stated that she is owner of land measuring 1 cottah 8 chitaks acquired by her by gift deed by her father. Opposite party-1 is a construction company and opposite party-2 is its proprietor. The complainant wanted to develop the land and convert the same into a multi-storied building. The opposite parties approached the complainant for development of the said land. An agreement was entered between the complainant and opposite parties on 30.05.2014. As per agreement, the complainant’s allocation was the entire first floor of the proposed three storied building. The construction was to be completed and possession handed over within 24 months from the date of the agreement. The opposite parties failed to complete the construction and handover the possession even after expiry of 36 months although possession of the land was delivered on the date of agreement. The construction work is incomplete and sewerage, drainage and other allied works were also incomplete. It was also agreed that the opposite parties shall pay an amount of Rs.150000/- to the complainant in three equal instalments of Rs.50000/- each. First instalment was to be paid at the time of agreement, second instalment on starting of the project and third instalment on completion of first floor. The opposite parties paid the first instalment of Rs.50000/- at the time of agreement but thereafter did not pay any amount. As the opposite parties failed to deliver the possession, the complainant is compelled to reside in a rented accommodation and she was paying Rs.8500/- per month as licence fees from November, 2017. In this regard, the complainant sent a legal notice dated 06.03.2018 to the opposite parties, which was replied by them by making false and frivolous statements and supressing the material facts. Then, the complainant filed above complaint with the State Commission.
6. The complaint was contested by the appellants (opposite parties) by filing the written version stating that during the construction the complainant approached the appellants for several changes in her flat due to which some extra time was consumed and the opposite parties had to bear extra cost of construction and LBS Charges for approval of layout plan. The complainant has taken forcible possession of her allocation. The opposite parties have already paid the remaining amount of Rs.100000/- to the mother of the compla