ORDER
J.K. Mehra, J. (Member)
1. This first appeal arises out of the Order of the State Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, whereby the State
Commission allowed the complaint. Feeling aggrieved by the Order of the
State Commission the Opposite Parties have come in appeal to us. The
facts in brief which lead the Complainant to approach the State
Commission are as under:
The Complainants, allottees of the flats to be constructed by
the Opposite Parties, builder, paid the full amount under the contract to
the Opposite Parties which payment was duly acknowledged by the
Opposite Parties. As per the contract the flats were to be constructed
within a specified time, i.e. by March, 1995. The Complainants allege that
till the date of filing of the complaint before the State Commission, in spite
of all possible efforts, no steps were taken by the Opposite Parties to
register the flats in their favour. This has lead the Complainant to approach
the State Commission for relief.
2. The complainants allege that after the execution of the
agreement for sale and even after receipt of the full consideration money
the opposite parties proceeded with the construction at a snail pace and
failed to complete the construction within the stipulated/anticipated period
in the agreement and after lapse of 11 to 14 months specified in the
agreement possession letters were issued only to complaints No. 1 to 8
and 13 and no steps has been taken for completion of sale by execution
and registration of the sale deeds in respect of the seven flats of the
complainants. The complainants allege that out of the total number of 18
flats, sale in respect of none of the flats including that of the complainants
have been completion by execution and registration of the sale deed in
terms of the agreement for sale as a result of which the complainants have
faced huge monitory loss and undue harassment for which the opposite
parties are liable. The complainants also state that the registration of the
flats cannot be kept in abeyance for an indefinite period in spite of
compliance of their parts of covenants in the agreement for sale. The
complainants further alleged that the flats were to be constructed by March
1995 and the sale deed was to be executed and registered by the same
time. For the reasons stated above, alleging deficiency in service on the
part of the opposite parties, the complainants approached the state
commission claiming compensation of Rs. 14 lakhs, costs to the tune of Rs.
30,000/- and interest at 21% from March 1995 over the amount of
Rs. 15,47,000/- which comes to Rs. 4 lakhs. The complainants also prayed
that direction may be given to the opposite parties to complete the
construction in the seven flats and issue letters of possession in favour of
the complainants Nos. 9 to 12, a direction to be given to the opposite
parties to conclude and complete the sale of flats Nos. 2B, 1D, 2A, 3D, 1A,
1C and 4D of the housing complex situated at Dag Nos. 85 and 86 and that
the opposite parties may be directed not to interfere with the possession of
the complainants over their in respect to flats being the flat Nos. 2B, 1D,
2A, 3D, 1A, 1C and 4D of the said housing complex. One of the defences
against execution and registration of the conveyance deeds was that the
State Government had vide its notification No. 3044/FT dated 4.12.1996
had forbidden registration of the flats in the area. That notification was
withdrawn by a further notification of the State of West Bengal respectively
adopting vide Notification No. 511-HI/NTP/1P-1/2000(Pt.6) dated 21st May,
2001. Therefore, there was no impedement thereof to the execution and
registration of the sale deeds. It was in the light of this and all other factors
that the State Commission passed its Order directing the Opposite Party to
execute and register the conveyance deed within one week. The Appellant
]has only reiterated all those points which have been elaborately dealt with.
No new point has been urged before us, nor has the appellant been able to
show as to how the impugned order suffers from infirmity. The State
Commission upon hearing both the parties went into a great detail of the
matter and directed the opposite parties to execute and register the deed
of conveyance in respect of all the complainants within a period of one
months from the date of the order of the state commission and disposed of
the complaint.
3. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the State Commission the
opposite parties came in appeal to this Commission assailing the same on
various grounds. After having gone through the order of the State
Commission, the appeal filed by the opposite parties before us along with
the various annexures and after hearing the learned counsel appearing on
both sides, we are of the considered the opinion that the order of the state
commission is cogent, convincing and well reasoned and does not call for
any interference by this Commission. In view of the above discussion we
dismiss the appeal with costs quantified at Rs. 2,500/-.