District
: South 24-Parganas.
Before
the Hon’ble District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, at Alipore, Kolkata –
700 027, South 24-Parganas.
Complaint Case no. _______of 2015.
In
the matter of :-
An
application under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986;
A
N D
In the
matter of:
1.
Shri ABHIJIT ROY, Son of
Shri Digendra Nath Roy, presently staying and residing at premises being no. 29/70, 3rd
Floor, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi – 110008, behind gurudwara, represented by his Constituted Attorney Shri
Digendra Nath Roy, Son of Late Mahendra Nath Roy, residing at premises being
no. 35, School Road, Santoshpur, Flat no.6, Kolkata – 700 075.
2.
Smt. Kalpana
Roy, Wife of Shri Digendra Nath Roy, presently staying and residing at premises being no. 29/70, 3rd
Floor, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi – 110008, behind gurudwara, represented by her Constituted Attorney Shri
Digendra Nath Roy, Son of Late Mahendra Nath Roy, residing at premises being
no. 35, School Road, Santoshpur, Flat no.6, Kolkata – 700 075.
…COMPLAINANTS / PETITIONERS
- Versus –
1.
M/s.
Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, having Registered Office at Premises being
no. GF -12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, (1st floor ), Kolkata – 700
107, Police Station - Kasba.
2.
Mr.
Biswanath Mondal, Son of not known, Chairman cum Managing Director and
Authorised Signatory, of M/s. Greenhaven Realty Private Limited,
a)
M/s.
Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, having Registered Office at Premises being
no. GF -12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, (1st floor ), Kolkata – 700
107, Police Station - Kasba.
b)
Residing
at Village – Purba Goyalbati kheyadaha, Sonarpur, South 24 Parganas, Kolkata –
743369.
3.
Mrs. Ira Mondal, wife of not known, Director of M/s. Greenhaven Realty Private Limited,
a)
M/s.
Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, having Registered Office at Premises being
no. GF -12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, (1st floor ), Kolkata – 700
107, Police Station - Kasba.
b)
Residing
at Village – Purba Goyalbati kheyadaha, Sonarpur, South 24 Parganas, Kolkata –
743369.
4.
Mr.
Sudipta Kumar Ghosh, Son of not known, Director of M/s. Greenhaven Realty
Private Limited,
a)
M/s.
Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, having Registered Office at Premises being
no. GF -12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, (1st floor ), Kolkata – 700
107, Police Station Kasba.
b)
Residing
at premises being no. C-181, Baisakhi Abasan Block AG, Salt Lake, Kolkata – 700
091.
…
RESPONDENTS / OPPOSITE PARTIES
The
humble petition of the complainant / petitioner above named Shri Abhijit Roy,
and Smt. Kalpana Roy most respectfully;
SHEWETH AS UNDER :-
- That
the Complainants / Petitioner are peace loving and law abiding Citizen of
India, residing at the address as given in the cause title of this instant
application.
- That
The Complainants are residing at New Delhi, and the Complainant no.1, is
in service at New Delhi, and the Complainant no.2, is mother of the
Complainant no.1, and both are represented by their constituted Attorney
Shri Digendra Nath Roy, Son of Late Mahendra Nath Roy, residing at
premises being no. 35, School Road, Santoshpur, Flat no.6, Kolkata – 700
075, who is father of the complainant no.1, and husband of the complainant
no.2, herein.
- That
Since the complainants are not able to look after the matter concern of
the immovable property affairs at Kolkata, they granted and executed a
General Power of Attorney in favour of Shri Digendra Nath Roy, Son of Late
Mahendra Nath Roy, residing at premises being no. 35, School Road,
Santoshpur, Flat no.6, Kolkata – 700 075.
- That
M/s. Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, is a private limited Company
incorporated under Companies Act’ 1956, having registered office at
Premises being no. GF -12, 1953, Rajdanga Main Road, (1st floor
), Kolkata – 700 107, represented by it’s Chairman cum Managing Director
and other Directors being the respondent no. 2, 3, and 4. The Director
being the respondent no. 2, 3, and 4, are looking after the day to day
business of the respondent no.1, company, and are wholly responsible and
liable for the same.
- That
the Respondent Company is a Developer of Land into different nature of
plot of Land, and the developer has decided to develop land under the
brand name of Green Haven Realty Private Limited with several 400 Bighas
of land lying and situate in Mouza Sangur within Police Station Sonarpur,
District South 24 Parganas, divided in various scheme plots of land
measuring an area 02 (two ), 04 ( four ), 06 ( six ) and 10 ( ten )
cottahas plots and the Developer has undertaken to execute such
development work such as preparation, conversion and drawing suitable plan
etc. for necessary approval by the competent authority.
- That
in the year 2011, the Complainant no.1, with his mother Smt. Kalpana Roy,
was interested to purchase a plot of land as to build their own house in
the state of West Bengal, and they came across about the offer of the respondent
persons through different media advertisement. And in that year the
respondent persons known as Green heaven Realty, a partnership firm, which
subsequently converted and registered as of Greenhaven Realty Pvt.
Limited., as intimated by the respondent no. 4, herein vide his letter
dated 24-09-2012.
- That
the Complainant no.1, paid ₹ 94,000/- ( Rupees Ninety Four Thousand )
only, vide Cheque being no. 679477, dated 02-11-2011, drawn on SBI, as of
20% valuation of the plot, to the respondent company, as per the respondent
terms and the respondent company acknowledge the same vide letter dated
06.01.2012, and intimated that the plot being number 4B110, in the
Township project GREEN CITY SONARPUR, has been allotted.
- That
the Complainants regularly made payments of the installments, as per the
terms of the respondent company, and subsequently the respondent company
entered into an Agreement for Sale dated 23rd day of April’ 2012,
with the complainant and his mother Smt. Kalpana Roy, at the total
consideration of Rs. 4,30,000/- ( Rupees Four Lakhs and Thirty Thousand )
only, in respect of the schedule of Land as Land measuring 4 ( four )
Cottahs being Scheme Plot no. 4B110, lying and situated at Mouza SANGUR,
J.L. no. 108, Police Station and Sub Registry Office at Sonarpur, in the
District South 24 Parganas, together with right to take Electric, Tap
Water, Telephone etc., connection through over and under the said 20 feet
wide common passage adjacent to the said plot of land together with all
easement rights and appurtenance thereto.
- That
the Complainants paid as of ₹ 4,30,000/- ( Four Lakhs Thirty Thousand )
only, to the respondent company, in several equal installments, through
cheques as per the respondent company terms, and the said payments has
been acknowledged by the Directors through money receipts and or
statements.
- That
the Complainants after making the payments as asked for by the respondent,
the complainant visited the office of the respondent on several occasions
with a request to cause necessary endavour to execute a Deed of Conveyance
in favour of the complainant and his mother as per the terms of Agreement
for Sale dated 23rd day of April’ 2012, which has been
notorized on 30th day of July’ 2012 and on all occasions the respondent
assured to take necessary steps but all in vain.
- That
in the month of April’ 2014, the respondent persons came with the another
proposal as of that they have decided to modify their projects as PLOT
with Bunglow and asking for further payments towards additional costs. The
complainant decline to take such offer, and asked for refund of his money
paid with banking rate of interest along with compensation.
- That
as on 9th day of May’ 2014, the complainant no.1, sit with the respondent
persons and clearly acknowledge that he and his mother are not interested
in modified and or revised projects and therefore the complainant seeks to
get his money back with bank interest and compensation.
- That
on 11th day of May’ 2014, the complainant no.1, communicate
through email to the respondent person, and on 15th May’ 2014, and
16th day of June’ 2014, 18th day of June’ 2014, again
the complainant communicate such thing to the respondent person. The
respondent no.4, Shri Sudipta Kumar Ghosh, admit and acknowledge the
conversation dated 9th May’ 2014, and assured to place such
conversation into Board meeting for a suitable resolution.
- That
on 19-06-2014, the Complaints through their Constituted attorney Shri
Digendra Nath Roy, made an application to the respondent person requesting
inter alia with the earlier prayer for refund of money with banking
interest and compensation, which has been received and acknowledge with
the seal of the respondent company on 19-06-2014.
- That
on 16-08-2014, the respondent no.1, issued a letter under the signature of
the respondent no.4, intimating the refund of the amount as of ₹ 6,00,000/- ( Rupees Six Lakhs ) only,
through Cheque being no. 098879, dated 16-09-2014, drawn on ICICI Bank,
Kasba Branch, and the respondent no.2, being the Chairman cum Managing
Director issued the said Cheque and also acknowledge the contents of the
said cheque seperatly, under his signature and under the seal of the respondent
no.1, company, in favour of the complainant.
- That
it is to state that in discharge of existing legal debts and or
liabilities, a Cheque being no. 098879, dated 16-09-2014, drawn on ICICI
Bank, Kasba Branch, has been issued by the respondent no.2, being the
Chairman cum Managing Director and also the Authorised Signatory of the respondent
no.1, company, from an account maintained by the respondent no.1, company,
in favour of the complainant.
- That
the respondent no. 2, 3, and 4, being the Managing Director and the
Directors of the respondent no. 1, company, were in charges of and were
responsible for the conduct of the business of the respondent no.1,
company, and were at the helm of affairs of the company at the time of
issuing the said cheque, in favour of the complainant no.1.
- That
on 15th day of September’ 2014, the respondent no. 4, requested
the complainant through email, to present the said cheque on 27th
September’ 2014, and on 19th September’ 2014, the respondent
persons no. 2, through email requested to the complainant to present the
said cheque on 10th October’ 2014, instead of 27th September’
2014, which will be unchanged at any condition, as of stated by him.
- That
the respondent no. 2, communicated through email dated 14th
October’ 2014 and 18th October’ 2014 to the complainant showing
his inability of non payment and acknowledgement of legal debt and
liabilities towards the complainant.
- That
the Complainant no.1, presented the said cheque to his banker within it’s
validity period, for collection of value of the said cheque being no.
098879, dated 16-09-2014, drawn on ICICI Bank Limited, Kasba Branch,
Balaji Towers, 59, K.N. Sen Lane, Kasba, Kolkata – 700 042, for amount of ₹ 6,00,000/- ( Rupees Six Lakhs ) only, but
the same was dishonored with the remarks “Funds Insufficient” vide Cheque
Return memo dated 01-12-2014, which fact came to the knowledge of the
complainant on or about 01-12-2014, from his Banker along with Banker’s
Cheque return Memo, dated 01-12-2014.
- That
the above facts make it abundantly clear that the respondent persons have
mischievously and intentionally issued the said cheque with ulterior
design knowing fully well that the said cheque would not be honoured on
presentation on account of insufficiency of funds.
- That
the Complainant no.1, served one Legal Notice under Section 138 (b) read
with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, through his
Learned Advocate Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, vide notice dated 8th
day of December’ 2014, within prescribed period of the Negotiable
Instrument Act, 1881, calling upon all the respondent persons to make the
payment of the said cheque value of ₹ 6,00,000/- ( Rupees Six Lakhs ) only,
within a period of ( 15 ) fifteen days from the date of receipt of such
notice, through Speed Post, as on 08-12-2014.
- That
the Learned Advocate of the Complainant no.1, on getting tracking report
of the Indian Postal Authority, found that all the postal services has
been duly delivered and shown as delivered and whereas some of has been
served and delivered on 09-12-2014, some of on 11-12-2014 and 12-12-2014,
and therefore the respondent persons are in receipt of the notices served
on them.
- That
the respondent persons are well within the knowledge of the dishonor of
the said cheque and the notices served on them but the respondent persons
did not make any payment towards the value of the said cheque within a
period of fifteen days from the date of knowledge which expire latest by 27-12-2014,
and therefore the cause of action arose for the present complaint.
- That
in the Agreement for Sale dated 26th October’ 2012, at page no.
3, para 1, at last portion it has been described as “ In the event of
failure to give maraketable title to the Purchaser / Allottee the
Developer under takes to refund the amount that will be paid upon
execution of these presents to the Purchaser / Allottee.” And in para 3,
stated as “ Each allotte along with the Developer will be entitled to the
following easement rights and similarly be subject to similar easements
and rights to the other unit allottees as also the developer i) Right of
access and way in common with the Developer and / or other allottees at
all time with the use and enjoyment of common area and facilities to which
they are entitled to. Ii) Easements quasi easements, appendages and appurtenances belonging to or
appurtenant to plots as usually held used and occupied or known as part or
parcel thereof or appertaining thereto provided always that nothing herein
contained shall permit the allottee or any person deriving title under him
or his agent and invitee to obstruct in any way by vehicle, deposit or
materials, rubbish or otherwise free passage of other person or persons including
the developer and other allottee entitled to such way as aforesaid. iii)
the right of protection of the plot by and from all parts of the project
as far as they are normally protected. iv) the right of flow in common of
electricity, telephone, water and waste or soil from and to the plot
through pipes, drains, wires, and conduits lying or being in under through
or over the other parts of the said project as applicable, so far as may
be reasonably necessary for the beneficial use occupation and enjoyment of
each plot.
- That
the Complainants beg to state that the Complaints dream of their own house
in the state of west Bengal has been shuttered at the instances of willful
and deliberate unfair trade practices of the respondents.
- That
the Complainants beg to state that the Complainants paid such amount of
valuable consideration as per Agreement for Sale dated 23rd day
of April’ 2012, to the respondents from their hard earned and saved money
to fulfill their dream but all in vain at the instances of unfair trade
practices of the respondents.
- That the Complainants state and
submits that the Complainants are 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.
- That
the Complainants solely seeks to get money or value of the purported
cheque, as of ₹ 6,00,000/- ( Rupees Six Lakhs ) only, from the Opposite Parties
/ Respondents, as was ascertained and given by the Opposite Parties /
Respondents at the event of change of the nature of their projects.
- That the Complainants 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. The complainants
assesses such loss and damages at ₹
3,00,000/- ( Rupees Three lakhs ) only.
- That the Complainants states and
submits that the purported activities of the respondents established
deficiency in services, which is contrary to the Law.
- That the Complainants /
Petitioners 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.
- That
the Complainants enclosing herewith the following documents / Papers :
Sl. No. |
Documents /
Papers |
Annexure |
1 |
General
Power of Attorney in favour of Sri Digendra Nath Roy, |
A |
2 |
Letter of
Allotment dated 16-12-2011, |
B |
3 |
Agreement
for Sale Dated 23-04-2012, |
C |
4 |
Statement of
account, |
D |
5 |
E-mail Conversation, |
E |
6 |
Letter dated
19-06-2014, |
F |
7 |
Letter dated
16-08-2014, |
G |
8 |
Cheque being
No. 098879, dated 16-09-2014, drawn on ICICIC BANK, Kasba Branch, Kolkata, |
H |
9 |
Bank’s
Return Memo dated 01-12-2014, |
I |
10 |
Complainant’s
Advocate Notice dated 08-12-2014, and Postal receipts of Speed Post, dated 08-12-2014, |
J |
11 |
Postal Track
Report, |
K |
12 |
Letter
dated 24-09-2012 |
L |
- That the Cause of action for the
present proceeding arose on 23rd day of April’ 2012, at the
execution of the Agreement for Sale, and thereafter on several occasions
as per communication between the parties, and lastly on 1st day
of December’ 2014, while the given cheque of ₹
6,00,000/- ( Rupees Six Lakhs ) only has been dishonoured by the banker of
the Opposite Parties at the remarks of insufficient fund, and thereafter
adverse date and the same is continuing and the respondents / opposite
parties are residing as given in the cause title of this application,
which is within the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Forum.
- That the instant application /
Petition, is within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum, at Alipore, South 24-Parganas.
- That
the valuation of the present application ascertained as of ₹ 9,00,000/- ( Rupees Nine Lakhs ) only, such
as the given cheque of the respondents / opposite parties valued of ₹ 6,00,000/- ( Rupees Six Lakhs ) only and 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. The complainants assesses such loss and damages at ₹
3,00,000/- ( Rupees Three lakhs ) only.
- That the present complaint is
being filed within the period as prescribed under section 24 A, of the
Consumer Protection Act.
- That your Petitioner crave leave
to produce the relevant documents and / or papers at the time of hearing
or evidence, before the Hon’ble Forum.
- That the present complaint being
made bona-fide and in the interest of justice.
- 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 respondents / opposite
parties to pay ₹ 6,00,000/- ( Rupees
Six Lakhs ) only, being the value of the purported cheque, to your petitioner, as was ascertained and given by the Opposite
Parties / Respondents at the event of change of the nature of their projects;
b)
To direct the opposite parties to pay
compensation, as for the harassment, troubles, loss of business, physical
inconvenience and mental agony, suffered by the petitioners from the purported
activities and others by the opposite parties as assessed as ₹
3,00,000/- ( Rupees Three Lakhs ) only to your petitioners;
c)
To grant the cost of the proceedings ;
d)
To grant any other relief or alternate relief
to the applicants / petitioners 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,
Sri Digendra Nath Roy, being the constituted attorney of Petitioners 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 Forum and I duly sign and verify this application on
_____________2015, at the Alipore, Kolkata.
Sri
Digendra Nath Roy
Identified
by me,
Advocate.
Prepared
in my Chamber,
Advocate.
Dated
: ____________2015.
Place
: Alipore, Kolkata.
District
: 24-Parganas South.
BEFORE
THE HON”BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AT ALIPORE, KOLKATA –
700 027.
Complaint
Case no…………..…of 2015.
In the matter of
:-
Sri Abhijit Roy and Anr,
…….Applicants / Petitioners.
-
Versus –
M/s.
Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, and others,
………Respondents / Opposite Parties.
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit
of Shri Digendra Nath Roy, Son of Late Mahendra Nath
Roy, aged about ______ years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation _____________, residing
at premises being no. 35, School Road, Santoshpur, Flat no.6, Kolkata – 700 075.
I,
the above deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-
1
: That I am the constituted attorney of the Complainants / Petitioners, and
thoroughly conversant with the facts and circumstances of the present case and
am competent and authorized 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 …………….2015, at the Alipore, Kolkata.
DEPONENT
Identified
by me,
Advocate.
Prepared
in my Chamber,
Advocate.
Dated
:……………2015.
Place
: Alipore, Kolkata.
N
O T A R Y
Vakalatnama
District
: South 24-Parganas.
BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AT ALIPORE, SOUTH 24 PARGANAS
Case No. of
2015.
Shri Abhijit Roy and Anr, COMPLAINANTS
Versus .
M/s. Greenhaven Realty Private Limited, and
others,
RESPONDENTS
KNOW ALL MEN by this presents that I Shri Digendra Nath Roy, Son of Late Mahendra Nath Roy, residing at
premises being no. 35, School Road, Santoshpur, Flat no.6, Kolkata – 700 075, being the Constituted Attorney of the
Complainants / Petitioners,
do hereby constitute and appoint the
undermentioned Advocate, Pleaderes, Vakils, jointly & each of them
severally to be pleader of ME / US and on MY / OUR behalf to appear for ME / US
in the above cause and to take such steps and proceeding as may be necessary on
MY/ OUR behalf and for the purpose to make sign verify and present all
necessary petitions, plaints, written statements and other document and do
nominate and appoint or retain senior Counsels, Vakils, Advocate and other
persons, lodge and deposit moneys and document and other papers in court and
the same again to 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 proceeding arising thereout whether by woy
of execution, riview appeal or otherwise or in any manner contested therewith
as effectually and to all intents and purpose as I / WE could act if personally
present and ALSO for all and of the purpose aforesaid to appoint a substitute
or substitutes 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 by MY / US.
This_____________ day of __________ 2015 been executed
- Shri Manoj Kumar
Halder, Advocate.
- Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate.
- Shri Rabindra Nath Das, Advocate.
- Shri Saheb Halder, Advocate.
- Shri Sandip Roy Chowdhury, Advocate.
- Shri Pradip Paul, Advocate.
- Miss Jahira Begum, Advocate.
No comments:
Post a Comment