Wednesday, October 29, 2025

WRITTEN VERSION OF OPPOSITE PARTIES M/s. S.S. Construction and Sri SujitSaha

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION

KOLKATA UNIT-III(South),West Bengal

18, Judges Court Road, Kolkata 700027

 

Consumer Complaint no. 226 of 2024

 

 

                                                          In the matter of ;

 

1.   Smt. KakaliSen, Wife of Sri AbhinandanGhosh, and Daughter of Sri Amal Kumar Sen,

 

2.   Sri AbhinandanGhosh, Son of Sri ChittaranjanGhosh,

 

Both are permanent residents of Banshbari, P.O. – Banshbari, P.S. – English Bazar, District – Malda, PIN – 732201, and presently residing at D/82, Bapuji Nagar, P.O. – Regent Estate, P.S. – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700092.

_____Complainants

-      Versus –

 

1.   M/s. S.S. Construction, a proprietorship firm, having its registered office at A/61/2, Bapuji Nagar, P.O. – Regent Estate, P.S. – Jadavpur, Kolkata - 700092.

 

2.   Sri SujitSaha, Sole Proprietor of M/s. S.S. Construction, residing at A/61/2, Bapuji Nagar, P.O. – Regent Estate, P.S. – Jadavpur, Kolkata - 700092.

________Opposite Parties.

 

WRITTEN VERSION

OF OPPOSITE PARTIES

M/s. S.S. Construction and Sri SujitSaha,

 

The humble petition on behalf of the above named Opposite PartiesM/s. S.S. Construction and Sri SujitSaha, most respectfully;

Sheweth as under;

 

1.   That the Petitioner has been served with the purported copy of petition, made by the Complainants. The Petitioner have gone through the contents of the purported petition and made replies to the same, are as follows.

 

2.   That the Consumer Complaint is not maintainable in its present form, either in term of the facts or in term of the Law.

 

3.   That the Petition is speculative, harassing, motivated and barred by the Principles of Law and hence it is liable to be rejected at once.

 

4.   That the petition is suffering from misjoinder and non-joinder of necessary party in the proceeding, and therefore liable to be dismissed at once with exemplary costs.

 

5.   That the petition is suffering from suppression of material facts and necessary party, and therefore liable to be dismissed at once with exemplary costs.

 

6.   That the petition is suffering from any legal demand and thereby cause of action, the present petition is motivated and without any jurisdiction.

 

7.   That the Opposite Party, do not admit all the allegations made in the application of the Petitioners / Complainants, to be true and save and except those that are specifically admitted he put the Petitioners, to the strict proof of the rest.

 

8.   That the contents of the Complaint is vague and based on after thought concocted story, made out by the Complainants to in-clinch issues in theirfavour, and thus no part of the contents of the Complaint has ever been admitted by the Opposite Party, except those are the matter of records.

 

9.   That the Opposite Party states that the present Complaint has been instituted by the Complainants against this Opposite Party to cause several hassle and harassments to this Opposite Party.

 

10.          That the complainantsare not a Consumer as per provision of Section 2 (7) of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, and therefore deserve to be dismissed with cost thereof in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

11.          That the present complaint has not been placed in terms of the provision of Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, and therefore deserve to be dismissed with cost thereof in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

12.          That the present Complaint did not disclose any cause of action to be accrued ever to place the present consumer application, more particularly against this opposite party.

 

13.          That the present complaint has no cause of action to place before the Hon’ble Commission, in any terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, and therefore deserve to be dismissed with cost thereof in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

14.          That the present complaint has no accrual of any cause of action to place before the Hon’ble Commission, in any terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, and therefore deserve to be dismissed with cost thereof in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

15.          That the story of the complainant does not constitute the consumer disputes in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, and therefore deserve to be dismissed with cost thereof in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

16.          That the present Consumer application has not been valued appropriately for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Commission, and therefore deserve to be dismissed with cost thereof in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

17.          That the present application of the complainantsare an endavour of them to cooked up a false story, and manufactured documents shown to be relied on by them, before the Hon’ble Commission, for their wrongful gains and others, and therefore deserve to be dismissed with cost thereof in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

18.          That the present complaint is false, vague, and frivolous one, and thus entitle the rejection with cost on the complainants, in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

19.          That there is no Consumer disputes to be adjudicated before the Hon’ble Commission, between the parties herein, and therefore deserve to be dismissed with cost thereof in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

20.          That the Opposite Party states and submits that the Complainant’s disputes, is not a Consumer dispute and the Complainants are not a consumer, as defined and enumerated in the relevant provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

21.          That before dealing with the statements made in the petition under objection paragraph wise, this Opposite Party states the following facts for Your Honour’s kind perusal :

 

(i)           M/s. S.S. Construction a Proprietorship Firm carrying on its business at Premises being No. A/61/2, Bapuji Nagar, Police Station – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700092, represented by its Sole Proprietor ShriSujitSaha, Son of Late SambhunathSaha, residing at Premises being no. A/61/2, Bapujinagar, Post Office – Regent Estate, Police Station – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700092, carrying its business in the field of Realty & Construction.

 

(ii)          The Opposite Party no. 1, represented by the Opposite Party no. 2, entered into Development Agreement dated 21-12-2012, with the Land Owners (1) Sri AmritlalDutta, (2) Sri DhananjoyDutta, (3) Sri Ajay Dutta, (4) Sri DigbijayDutta, (5) Smt. GopaDutta, and (6) Smt. Molina Dutta. The said Development Agreement registered on 21-12-2012, before the D.S.R. – I, Alipore, vide Book No. I, CD Volume No. 20, Pages 216 to 240, Being No. 04460 for the year 2012., in respect of ALL THAT piece and parcel of land measuring more or less 04 Cottahs lying and situate at Mouza – Baderaipur, J.L. No. 34, within Police Station – Jadavpur, comprised in C.S. Plot No. 523 (P), 524 (P), 532 (P), 533 (P), Being E/P No. 54, S.P. 212, District South 24 Parganas, under Ward No. 96, of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, Premises No. 62E/54A, Raja Subodh Chandra Mullick Road, also known as Postal Premises No. D/82, Bapuji Nagar, Post Office Regent Estate, Police Station Jadavpur, Kolkata 700092, District South 24 Parganas.

 

(iii)        Subsequently, The Owners executed a registered Power of Attorney in favour of Sri SujitSaha, on 21-12-2012, registered before the D.S.R. –I, Alipore and recorded in Book No. I, CD Volume No. 20, Pages 241 to 256, Being No. 04461 for the year 2012, to do any acts and things on their behalf and also empowered to enter any Agreement for Sale and to execute Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said property to any intending Purchasers.

 

(iv)         The Complainants herein have approached the opposite party no.2 with an intention to parches a flat along with a covered car parking space from the developer’s allocation being flat no. 2B on the southern side of first floor measuring an area of about 750 sq. ft. a little more or less super built up area consisting of 2 (Two) bed rooms, 1 (One) kitchen, 1 (One) drawing-cum-dining, 1 (One) toilet, 1 (One) WC, 1 (One) Balcony and a covered car parking space measuring about 125 sq. ft. one the ground floor of the proposed G+3 storied building to be constructed by the opposite party no.2 in the said premises.

 

(v)          Accordingly, the complainants herein enter into a registered agreement for sale which was registered on 5th January 2016 before the office of the DSR-I, Alipore, registered in Book No. I, Volume No. 1601/2016, Pages 1160 to 1210, Being No. 060100025 for the year 2016.

 

(vi)         It was agreed by and between the parties that the sale consideration would be Rs. 42 Lakhs (Rupees Forty Two Lakhs only) and accordingly complaints herein procured a loan two the tune of Rs. 33,60,000/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs Sixty Thousand only) from the HDFC Bank for making payment towards the purchase of the said residential flat being Flat No. 2B on the southern side of first floor measuring an area of about 750 sq. ft. a little more or less super built up area alongwith a covered car parking space on the ground floor of the G+3 storied building proposed to be constructed at the premises No. D/82, Bapuji Nagar, P.O – Regent Estate, P.S – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700092.

 

(vii)       The Complainant herein paid a sum of Rs. 6,80,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs and Eighty Thousand) only, on the day of execution of the Agreement for Sale dated 21-12-2012. Subsequently, the Complainants tendered two numbers of demand drafty being nos. 095491, and 095492, dated 25-06-2016, amounting to Rs. 85,000/- (Rupees Eighty Five Thousand) only, and Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand) only, respectively. The Complainants herein procured a loan to the tune of Rs. 33,60,000/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs and Sixty Thousand) only, and Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only, on 27/12/2022. Thus a total sum of Rs. 41,96,000/- (Rupees Forty One Lakhs and Ninety Six Thousand) only, has been paid by the Complainants herein till the 27th day of December’ 2022. The Complainants are not due diligent in making payment of the consideration value of the subjected flat in terms of the agreement for sale dated 5th day of January’ 2016, even after handing over the Physical Possession of the said subjected flat by the Opposite Parties. The Opposite Party is still awaiting to get his balance sum of money from the complainants herein.

 

(viii)     It is stated that the said flat, as agreed upon by and between the parties, that the said flat with all amenities, fixtures and fittings to be handed over to the complaints herein within 2 years from the date of execution of the said agreement for sale, i.e. 5th January 2016.

 

(ix)        That after completion of the basic construction of the said G+3 storied building in the said premises, the complainants were given possession of the said flat by the opposite party no. 2 measuring an area of about 750 sq.ft. super built up area along with the car parking space measuring about 125 sq. ft. in the ground floor of the said premises.

 

(x)          That since the day of taking possession of the said subjected flat and Car Parking, the Complainants enjoyed without any hindrances, so far; But did not arrange themselves for the registration of Deed of Conveyance in terms of the said Agreement for Sale dated 5th day of January’ 2016.

 

(xi)        This Opposite Party is all along ready and willing to register the deed of conveyance in terms of the said Agreement for Sale dated 5th day of January’ 2016.

 

(xii)       That the complainantsare not a Consumer as per provision of Section 2 (7) of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

(xiii)     That there is no Consumer disputes to be adjudicated between the parties, before the Hon’ble Commission, between the parties herein.

 

(xiv)      That the present claim of the Complainants if any, is barred by the Limitation as enshrined under the provision of Section 69 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

(xv)       That the Opposite Party, have no iota of knowledge about the alleged story of the complainant herein.

 

(xvi)      That the Opposite party, herein have no relationship with the complainant herein as alleged by them, in their petition of consumer complaint.

 

(xvii)    That the opposite party, herein have no disputes as alleged by the complainants herein, in the petition of consumer complaint.

 

(xviii)  That the present Consumer disputes as alleged by the complainants herein, is not maintainable in the facts and in the law against the opposite party, in the terms of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

(xix)     That the allegations as contended by the complainants herein are all fake and frivolous one, as those are not substantiated with any single piece of papers or evidentiary value papers, against this opposite party.

 

(xx)       That the present complaint has been made before the Hon’ble Commission, motivated and with an intention for the wrongful gain and acquire of wrongful claim thereby the complainants herein.

 

(xxi)     That the Opposite Party, herein did not cause any deficiency in services, and or unfair trade practices, in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, and rules made thereof.

 

(xxii)    That there is no cause of action has ever been described and or more particularly raised against this opposite party, by the complainant.

 

22.    That without waiving any of the aforesaid Objections and Facts and fully relying thereupon and without prejudice to the same. This Opposite Party now deals with the specific paragraphs of the said Application in seriatim as hereunder.

 

23.    That the Application is not maintainable either in facts or in its present form and the petitioners have no cause of action for bringing this suit against the Opposite Party as the said application is speculative, harassing, motivated, concocted and baseless as is barred by the Principles of Law and hence same is liable to be rejected at once.

 

24.    Save and except the statements made in the said application which are matter of record, the Opposite Parties denies each and every allegations contained in the said application and calls upon the petitioner to strict proof of the said allegations.

 

25.    That with references to the statements made in paragraph nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11, of the application, this Opposite Parties deny and disputes each and every allegations made therein save and except what are the matters of record and not related to this opposite party. The Opposite Party repeats and reiterates the statement made in paragraph no.21, herein above. The Opposite Party states that M/s. S.S. Construction a Proprietorship Firm carrying on its business at Premises being No. A/61/2, Bapuji Nagar, Police Station – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700092, represented by its Sole Proprietor ShriSujitSaha, Son of Late SambhunathSaha, residing at Premises being no.A/61/2, Bapujinagar, Post Office – Regent Estate, Police Station – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700092, carrying its business in the field of Realty & Construction.The Opposite Party no. 1, represented by the Opposite Party no. 2, entered into Development Agreement dated 21-12-2012, with the Land Owners (1) Sri AmritlalDutta, (2) Sri DhananjoyDutta, (3) Sri Ajay Dutta, (4) Sri DigbijayDutta, (5) Smt. GopaDutta, and (6) Smt. Molina Dutta. The said Development Agreement registered on 21-12-2012, before the D.S.R. – I, Alipore, vide Book No. I, CD Volume No. 20, Pages 216 to 240, Being No. 04460 for the year 2012., in respect of ALL THAT piece and parcel of land measuring more or less 04 Cottahs lying and situate at Mouza – Baderaipur, J.L. No. 34, within Police Station – Jadavpur, comprised in C.S. Plot No. 523 (P), 524 (P), 532 (P), 533 (P), Being E/P No. 54, S.P. 212, District South 24 Parganas, under Ward No. 96, of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, Premises No. 62E/54A, Raja Subodh Chandra Mullick Road, also known as Postal Premises No. D/82, Bapuji Nagar, Post Office Regent Estate, Police Station Jadavpur, Kolkata 700092, District South 24 Parganas.Subsequently, The Owners executed a registered Power of Attorney in favour of Sri SujitSaha, on 21-12-2012, registered before the D.S.R. –I, Alipore and recorded in Book No. I, CD Volume No. 20, Pages 241 to 256, Being No. 04461 for the year 2012, to do any acts and things on their behalf and also empowered to enter any Agreement for Sale and to execute Deed of Conveyance in respect of the said property to any intending Purchasers.The Complainants herein have approached the opposite party no.2 with an intention to parches a flat along with a covered car parking space from the developer’s allocation being flat no. 2B on the southern side of first floor measuring an area of about 750 sq. ft. a little more or less super built up area consisting of 2 (Two) bed rooms, 1 (One) kitchen, 1 (One) drawing-cum-dining, 1 (One) toilet, 1 (One) WC, 1 (One) Balcony and a covered car parking space measuring about 125 sq. ft. one the ground floor of the proposed G+3 storied building to be constructed by the opposite party no.2 in the said premises.Accordingly, the complainants herein enter into a registered agreement for sale which was registered on 5th January 2016 before the office of the DSR-I, Alipore, registered in Book No. I, Volume No. 1601/2016, Pages 1160 to 1210, Being No. 060100025 for the year 2016.

 

26.    That with references to the statements made in paragraph nos. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20, of the application, being the petition of the complaint made by the complainant, this Opposite Parties deny and disputes each and every allegations made therein save and except what are the matters of record and not related to this opposite party. The Opposite Party repeat and reiterate the statements made in paragraph no. 21, herein above. The Opposite Party states that it was agreed by and between the parties that the sale consideration would be Rs. 42 Lakhs (Rupees Forty Two Lakhs only) and accordingly complaints herein procured a loan two the tune of Rs. 33,60,000/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs Sixty Thousand only) from the HDFC Bank for making payment towards the purchase of the said residential flat being Flat No. 2B on the southern side of first floor measuring an area of about 750 sq. ft. a little more or less super built up area along with a covered car parking space on the ground floor of the G+3 storied building proposed to be constructed at the premises No. D/82, Bapuji Nagar, P.O – Regent Estate, P.S – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700092.The Complainant herein paid a sum of Rs. 6,80,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs and Eighty Thousand) only, on the day of execution of the Agreement for Sale dated 21-12-2012. Subsequently, the Complainants tendered two numbers of demand drafty being nos. 095491, and 095492, dated 25-06-2016, amounting to Rs. 85,000/- (Rupees Eighty Five Thousand) only, and Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand) only, respectively. The Complainants herein procured a loan to the tune of Rs. 33,60,000/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs and Sixty Thousand) only, and Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only, on 27/12/2022. Thus a total sum of Rs. 41,96,000/- (Rupees Forty One Lakhs and Ninety Six Thousand) only, has been paid by the Complainants herein till the 27th day of December’ 2022. The Complainants are not due diligent in making payment of the consideration value of the subjected flat in terms of the agreement for sale dated 5th day of January’ 2016, even after handing over the Physical Possession of the said subjected flat by the Opposite Parties. The Opposite Party is still awaiting to get his balance sum of money from the complainants herein.It is stated that the said flat, as agreed upon by and between the parties, that the said flat with all amenities, fixtures and fittings to be handed over to the complaints herein within 2 years from the date of execution of the said agreement for sale, i.e. 5th January 2016.

 

27.    That with references to the statements made in paragraph nos. 21, 22, 23, 24, & 25, of the application, this Opposite Parties deny and disputes each and every allegations made therein save and except what are the matters of record and not related to this opposite party. The Opposite Party repeat and reiterate the statements made in paragraph no. 21, herein above. The Opposite Party states that That after completion of the basic construction of the said G+3 storied building in the said premises, the complainants were given possession of the said flat by the opposite party no. 2 measuring an area of about 750 sq. ft. super built up area along with the car parking space measuring about 125 sq. ft. in the ground floor of the said premises. Since the day of taking possession of the said subjected flat and Car Parking, the Complainants enjoyed without any hindrances, so far; But did not arrange themselves for the registration of Deed of Conveyance in terms of the said Agreement for Sale dated 5th day of January’ 2016.This Opposite Party is all along ready and willing to register the deed of conveyance in terms of the said Agreement for Sale dated 5th day of January’ 2016.

 

28.    That with references to the statements made in paragraph nos. 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30, of the application, this Opposite Parties deny and disputes each and every allegations made therein save and except what are the matters of record and not related to this opposite party. The Opposite Party repeat and reiterate the statements made in paragraph no. 21, herein above. This Opposite Party put forward his comments in the followings;

 

The complainant is not a Consumer as per provision of Section 2 (7) of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

Thereis no Consumer disputes to be adjudicated between the parties, before the Hon’ble Commission, between the parties herein.

 

The present claim of the Complainants if any, is barred by the Limitation as enshrined under the provision of Section 69 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

The Opposite Party, have no iota of knowledge about the alleged story of the complainant herein.

 

The Opposite party, herein have no relationship with the complainant herein as alleged by him, in his petition of consumer complaint.

 

The opposite party, herein have no disputes as alleged by the complainant herein, in the petition of consumer complaint.

 

The present Consumer complaint as alleged by the complainants herein, is not maintainable in the facts and in the law against the opposite party, in the terms of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

The allegations as contended by the complainant herein are all fake and frivolous one, as those are not substantiated with any single piece of papers or evidentiary value papers.

 

The present consumer complaint has made motivated and with an intention for the wrongful gain and acquire of wrongful claim thereby the complainants herein.

 

The Opposite Party, herein did not cause any deficiency in services, and or unfair trade practices, in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, and rules made thereof.

 

There is no cause of action has ever been described and or more particularly raised against this opposite party, by the complainant.

 

The Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in terms of his/ her prayer more particularly any relief as prayed to acquire from this opposite party. The allegations of the complainant are baseless, false and frivolous one, thus the prayer of the complainant is not tenable to give on the direction of this opposite party.

 

This opposite party is not a cup of tea for the complainant’s relief, as the same has been consumed by the complainant on full satisfaction.

 

The present consumer complaint is not tenable either in the facts or in the law, thus liable to be dismissed inlimnie with cost on the complainant.

 

The instant matter comes within the purview of Commercial dispute, which is within the ambit of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, therefore the present Consumer Complaint should be dismissed at once.

 

The Petition of Consumer Complaint is not in terms of the Provisions of Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

29.    That this opposite party states that the present petition of complaint is not bonafide against this opposite party, and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief in terms of her prayer made therein from this opposite party in terms of the provision of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019.

 

30.    That in the facts and in the laws, it is totally evident from the application itself that the complainants made their endeavor to put the Hon’ble Commission into motion to get their wrongful gains by procuring orders in terms of their prayer before the Hon’ble Commission.

 

31.    That in the facts and in the laws, it is totally evident from the application itself that the complainants are trying to miss utilizing the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Commission.

 

32.    That in the above circumstances, there is no cause of action for the present proceedings by the Petitioners, against the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, accordingly pray that the Consumer Complaint be dismissed with costs.

 

33.    That in the above circumstances, there is no deficiency in service, and or unfair trade practices, on the part of the Opposite Party, rather the Opposite Party is victim of the concocted story and wrongful demand of the complainant.

 

34.    That the entire facts are Commercial in nature, therefore the present consumer complaint should be dismissed inlimnie.

 

35.    That the instant matter comes within the purview of Commercial dispute, which is within the ambit of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, therefore the present Consumer Complaint should be dismissed at once.

 

36.    That in view of the facts that the Opposite Party is victim of the purported alleged allegations and wrongful demand, the Opposite Party thereby seeking compensation as of Rs. 1,00,000/- ( Rupees One Lakh ) only, for harassment and mental anxiety, arising from the institution of the present proceeding by the complainants, against this opposite party, before the Hon’ble Commission.

 

37.    That the Petitioner, neither has any cause of action nor the basis for filling the present consumer complaint and the Petitioners’ consumer complaint is entirely baseless and misconceived and deserve to be dismissed on this ground alone.

 

38.    That the Consumer Complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious and has been filed with the mala fide intention, and as such deserves to be dismissed with special costs.

 

39.    That the Petitioners, are not entitled to any relief as prayed in the Consumer Complaint, and the same is liable to be dismissed inlimnie.

 

40.    That in the aforesaid circumstances, the Opposite Party is seeking the dismissal of the Complaint filed by the Petitioners, with exemplary cost.

 

41.    That the Opposite Party crave leave to produce any necessary documents and or papers, in the proceeding at the time of hearing and or placing the Evidence on Affidavit, before the Hon’ble Commission, in the interest of Administration of Justice.

 

42.    That the present consumer complaint should be dismissed at once in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, as the same is found frivolous and vexatious one, against this opposite party.

 

It is therefore prayed that the Hon’ble Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, would graciously be pleased to allow this Written Version of the Opposite Party, and to dismiss and or reject at once the petition of consumer complaint filed by the Petitioners, against this opposite party herein, with costs, in terms of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, and rules made therein, in the interest of administration of justice, and or to pass such other necessary order or orders or further order or orders as the Hon’ble Commission, may deem, fit, and proper for the end of justice.

 

And for this act of kindness, the Petitioner, as in duty bound shall ever pray.

 

VERIFICATION

I, being the Opposite Party number 2, in the present consumer proceeding, I am acquainted and conversant with the material facts stated in the Written Version. I am Proprietor of the Opposite Party number 1, M/s. S.S. Construction. I verify, & sign the written version on ______July’ 2024, at the Alipore Judges’ Court Premises.

 

 

 

 

 

AFFIDAVIT

I, ShriSujitSaha, Son of Late SambhunathSaha, aged about ____years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation Business, residing at Premises being No. A/61/2, Bapujinagar, Post Office – Regent Estate, Police Station – Jadavpur, Kolkata – 700092, District South 24 Parganas, do hereby solemnly affirm and say as follows;

1.   I am Proprietor of the Opposite Party number 1, M/s. S.S. Construction. I am the Opposite Party number 2, in the present Consumer Proceeding. I am acquainted and conversant with the material facts stated in the Written Version and Competent to swear this affidavit.

This is true to our knowledge.

 

2.   That the statements made in paragraph number 1 to 21 of the Written Version are true to my knowledge and the rests are my humble submissions before the Learned Commission.

 

The above statements are true to our knowledge and belief.

 

 

 

 

DEPONENT

Identified by me,

 

Advocate

Prepared in my Chamber,

 

Advocate

Date : _______July’ 2024

Place :Alipore Judges’ Court

N O T A R Y

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment