Case nº First Appeal No. 1030 Of 2016, (Against the Order dated 20/04/2016 in Complaint No. 22/2012 of the State Commission West Bengal) of NCDRC Cases, February 10, 2017 (case Ms. Krishna Kunj Vs Rabindra Nath Basu & Ors.)
| Judge | For Appellant: Mr. Partha Sil, Advocate with Mr. Tavish B. Prasad, Advocate and Ms. Preeti Shukla, Advocate |
| President | Dr. B.C. Gupta,Presiding Member and Mr. Dr. S.M. Kantikar,Member |
| Resolution Date | February 10, 2017 |
| Issuing Organization | NCDRC Cases |
Order:
Dr. S. M. Kantikar, Member
-
M/s. Krishna Kunj, (opposite party No.1/petitioner) being a builder agreed to sell the flat in question at Rs.14,50,000/- at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per sq.ft.. The complainants have already paid Rs.12,59,000/- as per agreement of sale, and the balance amount of Rs.1,92,000/- was to be paid on the date of execution of the deed of conveyance, but the opposite party No.1 failed to keep his promise and demanded enhanced price at Rs.2,500/- per sq. ft. from the complainants. Thus, the complainants, Mr. Rabindranath Basu and Mrs. Manju Basu, filed the complaint before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal on the allegation that inspite of agreement of sale dated 31-05-2010 between them and opposite party No.1, M/s. Krishan Kunj, the developer is not executing and registering the sale deed of the flat, and hence, the opposite party be directed to execute and register deed of conveyance and to deliver possession, to pay Rs.5,50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards enhanced cost of registration, along with Rs.20,000/- as litigation cost.
-
The State Commission after considering the material on record allowed the complaint and directed the opposite party No.1 and the other opposite parties who were land owners to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant jointly and severally. Also, they were directed to handover possession of the same within thirty days. The complainants were directed to make payment of balance amount, prior to the date of execution of deed. Further, the opposite party No.1 was directed to pay Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost also.
-
Aggrieved by the impugned order, the opposite party No.1 developer filed this instant first appeal.
-
We have heard the learned counsel, Mr. Partha Sil at the time of admission. The counsel argued that the complainant had not made payment at the rate of Rs.2,500/-. The opposite parties Nos.2 to 19 were the land owners. They had entered into a development agreement with opposite party No.1 for construction of multi-storeyed building. Also the opposite party No.1 has made a genuine request for enhancement of cost owing to rapid increase in the cost of raw material and the government valuation of the property and escalation and the present market value of the said property is Rs.18,12,500/-. The opposite party No.1 claimed enhanced...
To continue reading
Request your trial