District : South 24 Parganas.
Before the Hon’ble State Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, at Premises being no. 11 A, Mirza
Ghalib Street,
Kolkata-700087.
Complaint
Case no. _______of 2014.
In
the matter of :
An application under
Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986, and rules made there under;
A N D
In the matter of :
Shri Balai Mitra, Son of
Late Nilmoni Mitra, residing at Village – Kamrabad, Post Office & Police
Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas
______Petitioner
/ Complainant.
-
Versus
–
1. M/s. Tara Maa Constructions, a
Proprietorship Firm, having it’s office at Village – Kamrabad, Ahutitala, Post
Office and Police Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24
Parganas.
2. Shri Samar Naskar, Son of Shri
Bihari Lal Naskar, Proprietor of M/s. Tara Maa Construction, residing at Village – Kamrabad, Ahutitala, Post Office
and Police Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas.
___________Respondents /
Opposite Parties.
The humble petition of
the above named petitioner / Complainant Shri Balai Mitra, most
respectfully;
Sheweth
as under :
1.
That
the Petitioner / Complainant is a Citizen of India, residing presently at the
address as given in the cause title of this application under Section 17 of the
Consumer Protection Act’ 1986, and rules made there under, and whereas the
petitioner / complainant is a permanent resident at Village
– Kamrabad, Post Office & Police Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150,
District – South 24 Parganas.
2.
That
M/s. Tara Maa Constructions having it’s Office at Village – Kamrabad,
Ahutitala, Post Office and Police Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150,
District – South 24 Parganas, represented by it’s Proprietor Shri Samar Naskar,
Son of Shri Bihari Lal Naskar, Proprietor of M/s. Tara Maa Construction,
residing at Village – Kamrabad,
Ahutitala, Post Office and Police Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150,
District – South 24 Parganas, is a Developer / Promoter, who engaged in a
construction work of building structures and related works thereof.
3.
That
your petitioner along with the other co-sharer is an owner in respect of Bastu
Land measuring about 4(Four) Kathas, 15 ( fifteen) Chittacks, more or less,
situated and lying at Mouza – Kamrabad, J.L. no. 41, comprising in R.S. Khatian
no. 722, L.R. Khatian no. 3793, R.S. Dag no. 5375, L.R. Dag no. 5380, Post
Office & Police Station – Sonarpur, District – South 24 Parganas, AND Bastu
Land measuring about 1 ( one ) Chittak, more or less, situated and lying at
Mouza – Kamrabad, J.L. no. 41, comprising in R.S. Dag no. 3378, L.R. Dag no.
5383, together as in Holding no. 750 of the Rajpur Sonarpur Municipality, under
Ward no. 9, Kolkata – 700 150, Post Office & Police Station – Sonarpur,
District – South 24 Parganas, with the old structure thereon, herein
referred to as “the Scheduled Property”.
4.
That
your petitioner with the other co-sharer of the Scheduled property, entered
into a Development Agreement, with M/s. Tara Maa Constructions having it’s
Office at Village – Kamrabad, Ahutitala, Post Office and Police Station –
Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas, represented by it’s
Proprietor Shri Samar Naskar, Son of Shri Bihari Lal Naskar, Proprietor of M/s.
Tara Maa Constructions, residing at
Village – Kamrabad, Ahutitala, Post Office and Police Station –
Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas, is a Developer /
Promoter, who engaged in a construction work of building structures and related
works thereof, vide Development Agreement dated 26th September’ 2011,
which has been duly attested by the Notary Public as on 30th day of
September’ 2011, for the construction of multi storied building thereon after
demolition of old structure, with specified terms and conditions between the
parties, as enshrined in the Development Agreement dated 26th day of
September’ 2011.
5.
That
the Opposite Parties entered into a Development Agreement with your
petitioner and his co-sharer as on 26th day of September’ 2011, and
subsequently an Agreement dated 27th day of September’ 2011, in
consequences to such Development Agreement dated 26th day of
September’ 2011, wherein the Opposite Parties as a developer agreed to develop
the schedule property of the Owners, and specified the schedule as given and or
handed over to the Owners in particularly to your petitioner, as shown in the
said agreement dated 27th day of September’ 2011.
6.
That
in the Agreement dated 26th day of September’ 2011, the Opposite
Parties have agreed to provide the Owners allocations as Owners’ allocation 38%
on each floor of the sanctioned plan to the Owners and the money as emphasized
in para no. 1.7, and 1.8, at page no. 4, as described in the Development
Agreement dated 26th day of September’ 2011, and more particularly
the specified schedule has been described in the Agreement dated 27th
day of September’ 2011, which has been described as the Developer agreed to
give Rs. 1,00,000/- ( Rs. One Lac ) only as forfeited money and a Flat measuring
total 500 Sq. ft. ( including the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ) and total
100 Sq. ft. Shop ( including the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ), that
means after taking the proportionate of Balai Mitra which is clearly mentioned
in the Agreement dated 26-09-2011, further stated as the Developer will pay Rs.
1,00,000/- ( Rs. One Lac ) only, out of which Rs. 50,000/- ( Rupees Fifty
Thousand ) only, at the time of the said Agreement and the rest amount of Rs.
50,000/- ( Rupees Fifty Thousand ) only, at his convenient time.
7.
That
your petitioner states that the Opposite Party has given a Cheque of Amounting of Rs.
50,000/- ( Rupees Fifty Thousand ) only, vide Cheque being no. 824928, dated
26-09-2011, drawn on Canara Bank, Sonarpur Branch, in favour of your petitioner,
which has been deposited with the banker of your petitioner, within a period of
validity of said cheque, though the said cheque has been dishonoured by the
Banker of the developer, with remarks as “Funds insufficient”, and resulting which,
your petitioner did not able to get any money and or value of the said cheque,
and whereas such incident has been acknowledged by your petitioner to the
Opposite Party / Developer, though the Opposite Party / Developer did not heed
to make such payments to your petitioner, till date.
8.
That
your petitioner states that the opposite party / developer have agreed in the
Development Agreement dated 26th day of September’ 2011, as in para
1.11 – Completion of building will be within 2 years from the date of Sanction
by Authority, in para 1.12 – The Developer will arrange the shifting for
vacating the premises to Owners namely Mr. Balai Mitra, and Developer will pay
the monthly rent of Rs. 1,200/- to the Two Owners namely Mr. Bakul Mitra, and
Mr. Kanai Mitra, till the completion of the building, in para 5.7 – the
Developer will pay the shifted cost in double. Owners also have to gain the
shifted cost ( House Rent etc. ) in double, at that time, in para no. 10 – the
Developer shall pay the money at the Market Price ( which must be decided by
both the Parties, means Developer and Owners ) to the Owners as per their
Proportionate Share if they want to sell their portion.
9.
That
your petitioner states that a General Power of Attorney has been executed in
favour of the opposite party / developer as such entrustment has been described
in the development agreement dated 26th day of September’ 2011, and
the said P.O.A. has been registered in Book no. IV, CD Volume no. 4, pages from
785 to 799, being no. 02110, for the year 2011, at A.D.S.R. Sonarpur, South 24
Parganas.
10.
That
your petitioner states that your petitioner and his other co-sharer, vacated
the premises, and handed over to the opposite party / developer in the month of
October’ 2011, though the opposite party / developer did not arrange any shift
to your petitioner and did not arrange to make any payments towards rent of the
tenanted premises, to your petitioner, since then till date.
11.
That your petitioner states that the opposite
party / developer, after demolition of the old structure yield the value of
Sale proceeds though did not given any thing to the Owners of the Land.
12.
That your petitioner states that the opposite
party / developer did not arrange in any manner, whatsoever to construct proposed
structure over the schedule property of the Owners, as agreed between the
parties, and he even did not take any endavour to apply for sanction of
building plan, with the concerned municipality, i.e. Rajpur Sonarpur
Municipality.
13.
That your petitioner states that the opposite
party / developer after taking possession of the schedule property and all
related documents in original thereto, seat idle, and did not act in accordance
with the Agreement dated 26th day of September’ 2011, and 27th
day of September’ 2011.
14.
That your petitioner states that a considerable
period has been elapsed / passed away, only due to purported acts and omissions
of the opposite party / developer, and whereas on several occasions your
petitioner visited the office of the opposite party / developer, asked and
requested for the compliance in accordance with the Agreement dated 26th day of
September’ 2011, and 27th day of September’ 2011, and payments of
money thereof and whereas on each and every occasions the opposite party / developer
placed lame excuses and assure to comply shortly, though did not comply yet.
15.
That your petitioner states that your
petitioner suffer a lot and compelled to reside in a tenanted house, rented at
Rs. 3,000/- per month, due to such deliberate in action and non compliance of
the covenant of the said Development Agreement dated 26th and 27th
day of September’ 2011, by the opposite party / developer.
16.
That your petitioner states that your
petitioner visited the opposite party / developer on several occasions, and
whereas on all and every occasions he assured to act in accordance with said
development agreement dated 26th and 27th day of
September’ 2011, and will make the payment of the stated money as soon as
possible, though nothing has ever been acted upon by him, in respect of
delivery of owners allocation, and he take time day by day on the different
pretext and others.
17.
That your petitioner states that such purported
acts of the opposite party / developer, are not in accordance with the said
Development Agreement dated 26th & 27th day of
September’ 2011, is an established act of deficiency in services, and causes of
mental agony and harrashment, as well as loss of money of your petitioner,
bearing rent for tenanted house and others.
18.
That your petitioner states that However before
taking shelter of Law, your petitioner seeks that the opposite party /
developer should act in accordance with the said Development Agreement dated 26th
& 27th day of September’ 2011, and to hand over the physical
possession of the Owners allocation and to make the payments of money as
enumerated in the Owners allocation, and or the money as of present market
value, and for such reasons alone, your petitioner served one Legal Notice,
through his Ld. Advocate, vide Notice being Ref. no. AKS / BM / 1879 / 13, dated 16-11-2013,
through Speed Post, stating inter alia praying for compliance at an early date,
preferably, within a period of fortnight from the date of receipt of such notice.
19.
That
your petitioner states that the Opposite party / developer received such
notices, as served upon him by the Learned Advocate of your petitioner, as on 18-11-2013,
as it’s appeared from the consignment tracking from the website of the India
Post, though the opposite party / developer did not reply and or answer such
notices of your petitioner, and did not endavour to comply in accordance with
the Agreement.
20.
That your petitioner states that the Developer
( i.e. the O. P. no. 1 & 2 ), did not hand over the Physical possession of
the Owner’s allocation as agreed upon nor he did make any payments of money as
agreed upon in the said Development Agreement dated 26th and 27th
day of September’ 2011, to your petitioner.
21.
That your petitioner states that as per the
Development Agreement dated 26th and 27th day of
September’ 2011, the Developer agreed to arrange the alternative accommodation
of the Owner, and all costs to be born by the developer only, during the
pendency of the proposed construction, though he did not comply with such terms
of the agreement and thus did not arrange any alternate accommodation and did
not pay any such costs to your petitioner.
22.
That your petitioner states that the Developer
agreed in the said Development Agreement dated 26th day of
September’ 2011, that the Owner’s allocation to be delivered within 2 years
from the day of Sanction of the building plan from Municipality, and entire
building should be completed within such period though did not apply for the
same and such period of 2 years has elapsed.
23.
That your petitioner states that your
petitioner suffer a lot and compelled to reside in a tenanted house, rented at
Rs. 3,000/- per month, due to the Developer’s such deliberate purported in
action and non compliance of the covenant of the said Development Agreement
dated 26th day of September’ 2011.
24.
That your petitioner states that your
petitioner has arranged an alternate accommodation, since the Developer did not
arrange the said alternate accommodation to your petitioner, and whereas in
such a compelling circumstances, your petitioner has bound to take an alternate
accommodation at premises as Village – Kamrabad, P.O. & P.S. – Sonarpur,
District – South 24 Parganas, and continued to be at the temporary
accommodation at the rent of Rs. 3,000/- ( Rupees Three Thousand ) only per
month from the month of October’ 2011, to till date and continuing and whereas
the developer did not pay any cost as the rent for such accommodation, which
has been agreed upon in the Development Agreement dated 26th day of
September’ 2011, as the Developer shall bear such costs as to rent for the
alternate accommodation during this period and till the day of the delivery of
the possession of the Owner’s allocation, to your petitioner, and thus for such
purported acts of the developer, your petitioner till the month of December’ 2013,
has born the rent as of Rs. 78,000/- ( Rupees Seventy Eight Thousand ) only,
which your petitioner seeks to get from the Opposite Parties / Developer.
25.
That your petitioner states that your
petitioner is still suffering as such your petitioner is residing at the rented
premises only due the developer undue endavour.
26.
That your petitioner states that your
petitioner is entitled to get the Owners allocation along with the other
co-sharer of the Scheduled property, in accordance with the Development
Agreement dated 27th day of September’ 2011, from the Developer.
27.
That your petitioner states that your
petitioner is a victim of the breach caused by the Developer and great looser
as such your petitioner is still suffering since did not get anything as
contained in terms of the Development Agreement dated 26th and 27th
day of September’ 2011, from the Developer / Opposite Parties / Respondents,
herein.
28.
That
the purported activities of the Respondents / Opposite Parties from the
beginning of the agreement with them, they motivated, and intentionally cause
the breach since the date of entrustment to them, as such they are not cause
any delivery and making any payment as of the Owner’s allocation, to your
petitioners till date.
29.
That
the purported activities of the Opposite Parties, which shows and established
their deficiency in services in providing and entering into the agreement for
development at some specific terms and conditions though willfully and
deliberately failed to carry out the same and / or failed to provide the
services as enumerated in the agreement for development dated 26th
day of September’ 2011, and 27th day of September’ 2011.
30.
That
the Petitioner state and submits that the Petitioner solely seeks to get the
delivery of possession and money as enumerated in the owner’s allocation, and
costs for the alternate accommodation, by the Respondents / Opposite Parties in
favour of your petitioner, in accordance with the Development Agreement dated 26th
day of September’ 2011, and 27th day of September’ 2011.
31.
That
your petitioner states and submits that your petitioner ascertained the present
market values of the owner’s allocation as described in the Agreement dated 27th
day of September’ 2011, (i.e. a Flat measuring total 500 Sq. ft. ( including
the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ) and total 100 Sq. ft. Shop ( including
the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ), that means after taking the
proportionate of Balai Mitra which is clearly mentioned in the Agreement dated
26-09-2011 ), are as of Rs. 80,00,000/- ( Rupees Eighty Lakhs ) only.
32.
That
your petitioner states and submits that in the event of alternate remedies in
the facts and circumstances, the value of allocation of your petitioner as of
Rs. 80,00,000/- ( Rupees Eighty Lakhs ) only, should be ascertained and in such
event your petitioner seeks to get such amount from the opposite party /
developer.
33.
That
the petitioner state and submits that the petitioner is a victim of the
purported acts and deficiency in services
at the instances of the opposite parties and the acts of the opposite
parties as well as the facts are well constitute the deficiency in services on
the part of the opposite parties.
34.
That
the petitioner state and submits that the respondents shall also pay the
compensation due to the complainant petitioner for the harassment, troubles,
physical inconvenience and mental agony arising directly out of the breach of
the agreement and breach of duty on the part of the respondents / opposite
parties. The complainant / petitioner, assesses such loss and damages at Rs.
6,00,000/- ( Rupees Six lakhs ) only.
35.
That
the Petitioner states and submits that the purported activities of the
respondents established deficiency in services, which is contrary to the Law.
36.
That
the applicant / Petitioner States and submits that from all of the statements
made above, it is clear that the opposite parties are guilty of deficiency in
service as meant in the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986.
37.
That
the Cause of action for the present proceeding arose as on 03-12-2011, due to
non payment of money as of Rs. 50,000/- ( Rupees Fifty Thousand ) only, at the
time of execution of the Development Agreement dated 26th day of
September’ 2011, and due to non arrangement of alternate accommodation by the
developer to your petitioner and non payment of the costs as to the rent for
such alternate accommodation, and lastly on 18-11-2013, while the developer
received the Letter dated 16th day of November’ 2013, while the
developer again did not perform in accordance with the specified terms and
conditions as enumerated in the Development Agreement dated 26th day
of September’ 2011, and 27th day of September’ 2011, and thereafter
day by day on failure and or breach of the terms of the said Development
Agreement dated 26th day of September’ 2011, and 27th day
of September’ 2011, by the Developer, and thereafter due to non – delivery of
physical possession and payment of money in accordance with the Development
Agreement dated 26th day of September’ 2011, and 27th day
of September’ 2011, and thereafter adverse date and the same is continuing till
date, and the respondents / opposite parties are residing and having office as
given in the cause title of this application, which is within the jurisdiction
of the Hon’ble Commission.
38.
That the present application / petition,
valued as the Value of Goods and or services as of Rs. 80,00,000/- ( Rupees
Eighty Lakhs ) only for the owner’s allocation as described in the Agreement
dated 27th day of September’ 2011, (i.e. a Flat measuring total 500
Sq. ft. ( including the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ) and total 100 Sq.
ft. Shop ( including the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ), that means after
taking the proportionate of Balai Mitra which is clearly mentioned in the
Agreement dated 26-09-2011 ), and Rs. 1,00,000/- ( Rupees One Lakh ) as of
forfeited money, as per Agreement dated 27th day of September’ 2011,
and Rs. 78,000/- ( Rupees Seventy Eight Thousand ) only, as the cost of the
alternate accommodation, as described in the Development Agreement dated 26th
day of September’ 2011, and Compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/- ( Rupees Six Lakhs ), as for the harassment,
troubles, loss of money, physical inconvenience and mental agony, suffered by
the petitioner from the purported activities and others by the opposite parties.
Thus Rs. 87,78,000/- ( Rupees Eighty Seven Lakhs and Seventy Eight Thousand )
only, is a value of the present application / petition.
39.
That
the instant application / Petition, is within the pecuniary jurisdiction of
this Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, at
Premises being no. 11 A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata-700087.
40.
That
the present complaint is being filed within the period as prescribed under
section 24 A, of the Consumer Protection Act.
41.
That
your petitioner enclosing herewith a copy of the Development Agreement dated 26th
day of September’ 2011, General Power of Attorney, and 27th day of
September’ 2011, collectively marked as Annexure – “A”.
42.
That
your petitioner enclosing herewith a copy of the Cheque being no. 824928, dated
26-09-2011, drawn on Canara Bank, Sonarpur Branch, for Rs. 50,000/- ( Rupees
Fifty Thousand ) only, issued by the opposite party / developer to your
petitioner, Bank return Memo, dated 03-12-2011, collectively marked as Annexure
– “B”.
43.
That
your petitioner enclosing herewith a copy of the Letter dated 16th
day of November’ 2013, which has been served upon the opposite parties, through
the Learned Advocate of your petitioner, marked as Annexure – “C”.
44.
That
your petitioner enclosing herewith the postal receipt of the Speed Post and the
Print out copy, as to report of the Consignment tracking obtain from the
Website of the India Post, towards the acknowledgment of services upon the
opposite parties, and collectively marked as Annexure – “D”.
45.
That
your Petitioner crave leave to produce the relevant documents and / or papers
at the time of hearing, of the case matter before the Hon’ble Commission.
46.
That
the present complaint being made bona-fide and in the interest of
administration of justice.
47.
The
Petitioner therefore prayed for :
Under the above facts
and circumstances, It is prayed that your Honour would be graciously pleased to
grant the following prayers / relief :-
a)
To
direct the opposite parties / respondents to deliver the physical possession of
the Owner’s allocation, and pay all money as enumerated in the Owner’s
allocation as stated and more particularly described in the Development
Agreement dated 27th day of September’ 2011, ( i.e. Rs. 1,00,000/- (
Rs. One Lac ) only as forfeited money and a Flat measuring total 500 Sq. ft. (
including the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ) and total 100 Sq. ft. Shop (
including the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ), that means after taking the
proportionate of Balai Mitra which is clearly mentioned in the Agreement dated
26-09-2011 ), to your
petitioner ;
b)
To
direct the opposite parties / respondents alternatively to pay the present
market values of the owner’s allocation as described in the Agreement dated 27th
day of September’ 2011, (i.e. a Flat measuring total 500 Sq. ft. ( including
the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ) and total 100 Sq. ft. Shop ( including
the Balai Mitra’s Proportionate Share ), that means after taking the
proportionate of Balai Mitra which is clearly mentioned in the Agreement dated
26-09-2011 ), are as of Rs. 80,00,000/- ( Rupees Eighty Lakhs ) only, and Rs.
1,00,000/- ( Rs. One Lac ) only as forfeited money, to your petitioner.
c)
To
direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 78,000/- ( Rupees Seventy Eight Thousand )
only, to your petitioner, as the cost of the alternate accommodation, as
described in the Development Agreement dated 26th day of September’
2011 ;
d)
To direct the opposite parties to pay
compensation, as for the harassment, troubles, loss of money, physical
inconvenience and mental agony, suffered by the petitioner from the purported
activities and others by the opposite parties as assessed as Rs. 6,00,000/- (
Rupees Six Lakhs ) only to your petitioner;
e)
To grant the cost of the proceedings ;
f)
To grant any other relief to the applicant /
petitioner as found out by your Honour, in the facts and circumstances of the
Complaint.
And to pass such other
necessary order or orders as your Honour , may deem fit and proper for the ends
of justice.
And for this act of kindness, the
Petitioner, as in duty bound shall ever pray.
Verification
I, Shri Balai Mitra, being the Petitioner, herein, do
hereby declare that the forgoing paragraphs no________to ________are true to
the best of my knowledge and rest prayers portions are my humble submission
before the Hon’ble Commission and I duly sign and verify this petition on
_____________2014, at Kolkata.
Shri Balai
Mitra
Identified
by me,
Advocate.
Prepared in my Chamber,
Advocate.
Dated : ____________2014.
Place : Kolkata.
District : South 24 Parganas.
Before the Hon’ble State Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, at Premises being no. 11 A, Mirza
Ghalib Street,
Kolkata-700087.
Complaint Case
no………..…of 2014.
In the matter of :-
Shri Balai Mitra,
……..Applicant / Petitioner.
-
Versus
–
M/s. Tara Maa Construction. and
others,
………Respondents
/ Opposite Parties.
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit
of Shri Balai Mitra,
Son of Late Nilmoni Mitra, aged about ______years, by faith Hindu, by
Occupation unemployed, residing at Village – Kamrabad, Post Office & Police
Station – Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas.
I,
the above deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-
1
: That I am being the petitioner, in the above case, thoroughly conversant with
the facts and circumstances of the present case and am competent to swear this
affidavit.
2
: That the facts contained in my accompanying complaint / application, the
contents of which have not been repeated herein for the sake of brevity may be
read as an integral part of this affidavit and are true and correct to my
knowledge.
DEPONENT
Verification
I,
the above named deponent do hereby solemnly verify that the contents of my
above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, and no part of it is
false and nothing material has been concealed therein.
Verified
this ………….the day of …………….2014, at Kolkata.
DEPONENT
Identified by me,
Advocate.
Prepared
in my Chamber,
Advocate.
Dated
:……………2014.
Place
: Kolkata.
N O T A R Y
VAKALATNAMA
District : South 24 Parganas.
Before the Hon’ble State Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, at Premises being no. 11 A, Mirza
Ghalib Street,
Kolkata-700087.
Complaint Case no.
______________of 2014.
Shri Balai Mitra, ___________Complainant / Petitioner.
- Versus –
M/s. Tara Maa Construction and others. ____________Respondents / Opposite Parties.
KNOW ALL MEN by these presents that I / We, Shri Balai Mitra, Son of Late
Nilmoni Mitra, residing at Village – Kamrabad, Post Office & Police Station
– Sonarpur, Kolkata – 700 150, District – South 24 Parganas,
do hereby constitute and appoint the under mentioned
Advocate, Pleader, Vakils, jointly and each of them severally to be pleader of
take such steps and proceedings as may be necessary on my / our behalf and for
that purpose to make sign, verify and present all necessary petitions, plaints,
written statements and other documents and do nominate and appoint or retain
senior counsels, vakil, advocates and other persons, lodge and deposits moneys
and documents and other papers in the Ld. Court and the same again withdraw and
to take out of Court and to obtain or grant as the case may be effectual
receipts and discharge for the same and for all moneys which may be payable to
me / us in the premises. To enter into compromise with my / our approval and
withdraw, all moneys from the court AND GENERALLY to act in the premises and proceedings
arising there out whether by way of execution, review, appeal, or otherwise or
in any manner contested there with as effectually and to all intents and
purpose as I / We could act if personally present and such substitution and as
pleasure to revoke I / We hereby ratifying and agreeing to confirm whatever may
be lawfully done by virtue hereof.
In
witness whereof this Vakalatnama has been executed by me / us.
This the …………………day of ………………2014.
Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate. High Court Bar Association Room No. 15, High Court at Calcutta, Enrollment No. F / 872 / 1199 / 2000, Bar Council of West Bengal. Mobile No. 9883070666 / 9836829666, E-mail : aksinghadvocate@rediffmail.com
Sri Manoj Halder, Advocate. Sri
Sandip Roy Chowdhury, Advocate. Sri
Rabindra Nath Das, Advocate. Sri Saheb Halder, Advocate. Miss Jahira Begum, Advocate.
Miss Priyanka Halder, Advocate.
No comments:
Post a Comment