Decided on July 13,2020

Sree Sree Partha Sarathi Developers Appellant
Taniya Roy Respondents


Prem Narain,J. - (1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant Sree Sree Partha Sarathi Developers and 4 Ors challenging the order dated 03.07.2017 passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal commission Kolkata (in short the State Commission) in consumer complaint No. 10 of 2014.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant No.1 is the developer and No.2 is the proprietor of the appellant No.1 and appellants 3-6 are the land owners. The developers and the landowners entered into a development agreement dated 7th March 2005. An agreement for sale was executed by all the appellants jointly with the respondent complainant for a self-contained flat admeasuring 904 square feet in the said premises on 4th December 2007. The total consideration for the flat was Rs.11,97,800/- but the complainant paid an amount of Rs.19,50,000/-. On 15th September 2009, the appellant No.1 authorized M/s Trinity Associates (its agent) to complete the construction of the building. As per the agreement for sale, the opposite parties were to give the possession of the flat by 30th April 2009. There was also provision in the agreement that for the late period the opposite parties shall compensate the complainant @Rs.3,500/- per month. The complainant has alleged in the complaint that the opposite parties failed to complete the construction and to hand over the possession in the promised time. It was also alleged that the developer enhanced the price to Rs.19,88,800/- on the ground of revision in the sanctioned plan thereby resulting in increase in super area. The complainant alleged that no revision of the sanctioned plan took place. The complainant requested for direction to the opposite parties to hand over the possession of the flat and to refund the excess amount paid to the developer as well as compensation for mental agony and cost of litigation. The State Commission allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties to deliver the possession and to execute the sale deed in favor of the complainant on the receipt of the balance amount of Rs.38,000/- by the complainant. The State Commission further directed OP1 and 2 to pay Rs.1.00 lakh and OP 3 to 6 to pay Rs.1.00 lakh as compensation to the complainant. Similarly Rs.10,000/- was to be paid as cost by OP1 and 2 and Rs.10,000/- by OP 3 to 6.
(3.) Aggrieved by the order of the State Commission, the OPs have filed the present appeal.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.