DIPAK DAS & ANR; DULAT DAS Vs. BENGAL SHRISTI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LTD & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 13th October 2017 of the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata ('the State Commission') in First Appeal no. FA/738/2014.

(2.) The facts of the case as per the petitioner/ complainant are that the respondent/ appellant/ opposite party being an infrastructure development concern intending to develop the integrated township under the name and style "Shristinagar" at Asansol, started to offer developed plots, plots with bungalows etc. to the intending purchasers. Petitioner no. 1 by an application form no. 569 applied for a plot measuring 2.05 kathas more or less at "Shristinagar". On receipt of the said application, the respondent therein provisionally allotted plot no. 49 to the petitioner no. 1 for a consideration of Rs.1,98,750/-. The petitioner no. 1 paid Rs.39,750/- towards 'Application Money' at the time of application and the respondent informed the petitioner that the rest of the consideration should be paid towards full and final payment within 30 days from the date of the letter dated 27.06.2005. On receipt of the allotment letter dated 27.06.2005 the petitioner no. 1 informed the appellant that he was not ready to pay the balance consideration without having physical verification of the plot. The respondent on receipt of the said letter (dated 02.07.2005) did not make any arrangement for the physical inspection of plot no. 49 rather they informed the petitioners by a letter dated 14.01.2006 that the petitioners would be liable to pay the balance consideration, amounting Rs.1,59,000/- with interest @ 18% per annum as per the agreement to be calculated from the due date (26.07.2005) till the date of actual payment. The respondent herein further informed the petitioners by letter dated 14.01.2006 that the provisional allotment would be cancelled if the petitioners failed to pay the balance consideration with accrued interest within 10 days from such date as per clause 7 of the terms of agreement for allotment of the plots. The petitioner in reply to the letter dated 14.01.2006 informed the respondents by a letter dated 02.02.2016 the reasons for non-payment of the balance amount as noted earlier and again requested the respondents to give instruction to his site office to show the plot no. 49 with boundary and to supply a copy of NOC obtained from the Directorate of Mines Safety for construction of residential houses on the proposed site but with no result. The petitioner no. 1 expressed his desire to incorporate the name of Mr Dulal Das, the petitioner no. 2 herein, as joint petitioner for obtaining a bank loan and his request was approved.

(3.) Subsequently on 12.04.2006, the respondents informed the petitioners that the provisional allotment would be cancelled if the petitioners would not pay the balance consideration of Rs.1,59,000/- along with interest @ 15% per annum to be calculated from the due date till the date of realization, to be paid within 10 days from such date and on receipt of such notice the petitioner no. 1 personally rushed to the office of the respondent, expressed his desire to pay the balance consideration on making inspection of the plot no. 49, allotted to him. Similar request was made by the petitioner no. 1 in reply to the letter dated 09.04.2007 issued to the petitioner no. 1. The respondents by a letter dated 08.07.2008 informed the petitioners that during demarcation of plot no. 49, it was found that the actual area of the plot has been increased from 2.5 kathas to 2.64 kathas for which the consideration was increased to Rs.2,09,880/- and the petitioners were asked to make payment of Rs.1,70,130/- which was agreed upon by the petitioners but subject to proper identification of plot no. 49 and its area to which the petitioners were again informed that the dispute regarding identification of the plot no. 49 has not been resolved to which the petitioiner requested the respondents to allot a plot of identical nature measuring 2.05 kathas as per petitioner's choice and paid a sum of Rs.1,70,130/- by cheque no. 154471 dated 14.07.2008 drawn on Axis Bank which was deposited by the respondent after a lapse of five months and 24 days. The said cheque was dishonoured for insufficiency of fund. On receipt of such information that the cheque was dishonoured, the petitioners expressed their desire to pay the balance consideration even in cash and requested the respondents to handover the plot no. 49 on payment. The respondents instead of acceding to his request preferred for cancellation of the allotment on the ground that the cheque no.154471 dated 14.07.2008 amounting Rs.1,70,130/- had been dishonoured. This according to the petitioners was deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the respondents against whom a complaint case being DF Case No. 152/2009 was filed and which was later withdrawn due to certain defects in the petition of complaint and after taking liberty from the DCDRF complaint no. 200/2012 with the following prayer: