BEFORE THE
HON'BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
SOUTH 24 PARGANAS AT BARUIPUR
Consumer
Complaint No. DC/304/CC/136 of 2025
In the matter of:
Rajiv Kumar Singh & Another
…Complainants
-Versus-
M/s. Development Corporation Private Limited & Others
…Opposite
Parties
REPLY ON AFFIDAVIT TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE FILED ON BEHALF OF OPPOSITE PARTY
NOS. 1 & 2;
AFFIDAVIT
I,
Rajiv Kumar Singh, Son of Amar Kumar Singh, aged about ____ years, by faith
Hindu, by occupation Business, presently residing at Flat No. 4D, Tower-16,
Genexx Valley, Joka, Kolkata – 700104, and Smt. Susmita Singh, Daughter of Jay
Prakash Narayan, aged about ____ years, by faith Hindu, by occupation
Housewife, presently residing at the aforesaid address, the Complainants above
named, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows;
1.
That
I have already filed my Evidence on Affidavit before this Hon'ble Commission.
Pursuant to the Questionnaire filed on behalf of Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2, I
am answering the questions hereinbelow according to my personal knowledge,
records available with me and legal advice received.
2.
That
the answers to the Questionnaire are as follows;
Reply to Question No. 1
Question:
Mr. and Mrs. Singh are you well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of
the instant case?
Answer:
Yes.
We are fully
acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the present case. The
transactions in question were entered into by us personally. The statements
made in the Complaint and Evidence on Affidavit are based upon our personal
knowledge, records maintained by us, documents executed between the parties and
correspondence exchanged with the Opposite Parties.
Reply to Question No. 2
Question:
How and from whom did you come to know about the Project "Solaris Joka
Phase-1"?
Answer:
We came to know about
the project through the promotional activities and marketing undertaken by the
Developer and its authorised representatives. Thereafter, we personally
contacted the Developer's office, visited the project office and obtained
brochures, application forms and other documents relating to the project before
submitting our application for allotment.
Reply to Question No. 3
Question:
Did you put your signature on the Agreement for Sale?
Answer:
Yes.
We executed and
signed the Agreement for Sale dated 02.05.2022.
Reply to Question No. 4
Question:
If your answer to the preceding question is "Yes", then please tell
whether you signed the Agreement for Sale after reading and understanding the
contents written therein?
Answer:
Yes.
We signed the
Agreement for Sale after reading and understanding its contents and believing
the representations, assurances, promises and contractual obligations
undertaken therein by all the executing and confirming parties.
Reply to Question No. 5
Question:
Please specifically mention the status of Opposite Party No.1 and 2 according
to your understanding.
Answer:
According to our
understanding and the documents executed between the parties, Opposite Party
Nos. 1 and 2 are the landowners of the project land and are also confirming and
consenting parties to the Agreement for Sale. They authorised the development
and sale of the project and are necessary and proper parties to the present
proceedings. Having participated in the transaction and having conferred rights
in favour of the Developer for construction and sale of the apartments, they
are jointly and severally responsible for due performance of the contractual
obligations arising out of the Agreement for Sale, including delivery of
possession and execution and registration of the Deed of Conveyance.
Reply to Question No. 6
Question:
You have described the Opposite Party No.1 and 2 as Landowners in your petition
of complaint. Is it true or untrue?
Answer:
It is true.
We have described
Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 as landowners because they are the owners of the
land on which the project has been developed. However, apart from being
landowners, they are also confirming and consenting parties to the Agreement
for Sale and have actively permitted and authorised the development and sale of
the project. Therefore, their liability is not confined merely to ownership of
land but extends to the obligations undertaken under the Agreement for Sale and
applicable law.
Reply to Question No. 7
Question:
From the date of making application for purchasing the flat till filing of the
instant case, please state with which Opposite Party did you communicate and/or
correspond?
Answer:
Our communications
were primarily made with Opposite Party Nos. 3 and 4, being the Developer and
its authorised representatives, who were managing the day-to-day affairs of the
project.
However, the
Agreement for Sale was executed by all the concerned parties including Opposite
Party Nos. 1 and 2 as confirming parties, and therefore all the Opposite
Parties are jointly responsible for the obligations arising therefrom.
Further, the legal
notices issued prior to institution of the present complaint were addressed and
served upon all the Opposite Parties.
Reply to Question No. 8
Question:
In which Opposite Party's favour did you make the payments till date?
Answer:
The payments were
made in favour of the Developer as per the demand letters and payment schedule
prescribed under the Agreement for Sale.
The said payments
were accepted pursuant to the arrangement existing between all the Opposite
Parties under the development arrangement, and the receipt of consideration by
the Developer does not absolve Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 from their
contractual and legal liabilities arising under the Agreement for Sale.
Reply to Question No. 9
Question:
Which type of flat did you apply for?
Answer:
We applied for
allotment of a D-Type Residential
Apartment, being Apartment No. 406 situated on the 3rd Floor, Tower-B, Zone-B1
of the project "Solaris Joka Phase-1", together with the parking
rights as mentioned in the Allotment Letter and Agreement for Sale.
Reply to Question No. 10
Question:
What is the consideration amount of the flat in dispute?
Answer:
The total agreed
consideration price of the flat in dispute, as specifically recorded in the
Agreement for Sale dated 02.05.2022, is Rs.
29,81,742/- (Rupees Twenty-Nine Lakhs Eighty-One Thousand Seven Hundred
Forty-Two only), inclusive of GST and other applicable charges as
stipulated therein. It is further stated that we have already paid an aggregate
sum of Rs. 29,98,074/-, which is
in excess of the agreed consideration by Rs. 16,332/-, besides making payment of Rs. 1,15,590/- towards stamp duty and registration charges and Rs. 25,771/- towards advance
maintenance charges as demanded by the Opposite Parties.
Reply to Question No. 11
Question:
What are the reliefs you sought for in your petition of complaint?
Answer:
The reliefs sought by
us in the Consumer Complaint are those specifically mentioned in the prayer
portion thereof, which include, inter alia:
(a) Delivery of
peaceful and vacant possession of the scheduled apartment;
(b) Execution and
registration of the Deed of Conveyance in our favour;
(c) Refund and/or
adjustment of the excess amount received from us;
(d) Refund of advance
maintenance charges, if found unjustified;
(e) Compensation for
prolonged delay, mental agony, harassment and financial loss suffered by us;
(f) Litigation costs;
and
(g) Such other or
further reliefs as this Hon'ble Commission may deem fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the case.
Reply to Question No. 12
Question:
Did you send any legal notice to the Opposite Party No. 1 and 2 before filing
the instant case?
Answer:
Yes.
Before institution of
the present Consumer Complaint, through our Learned Advocate, we issued a
detailed legal notice dated 14.07.2025
addressed to all the Opposite Parties, including Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2.
The said notice was duly served upon them. Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 also
caused a reply to be issued through their Advocate. Thereafter, we issued a
rejoinder. Copies of the legal notice, postal receipts, tracking reports, reply
and rejoinder have already been annexed with the Complaint Petition and the
Evidence on Affidavit.
Reply to Question No. 13
Question:
How do you claim yourself to be a consumer of the Opposite Party No.1 and 2?
Please explain.
Answer:
We are consumers
within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Opposite Party Nos. 1
and 2 are not strangers to the transaction. They are the owners of the project
land and are confirming and consenting parties to the Agreement for Sale
executed in our favour. They consciously authorised the development and sale of
the project, represented themselves through the contractual documents and
derived commercial benefit from the project.
The Agreement for
Sale executed by Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 created enforceable contractual
obligations in our favour. Consequently, there exists a clear relationship of
consumer and service provider between us and Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2. They
are jointly and severally liable along with the Developer for delivery of
possession, execution and registration of the Deed of Conveyance and fulfilment
of all contractual obligations. Therefore, we are entitled to maintain the
present complaint against them under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Reply to Question No. 14
Question:
Do you have any residential house/flat in Kolkata or around Kolkata?
Answer:
The existence or
otherwise of any other residential property owned or occupied by us has no
bearing whatsoever upon the issues involved in the present Consumer Complaint.
The present dispute
relates exclusively to the contractual obligations arising out of the Agreement
for Sale executed between the parties in respect of Apartment No. 406 in the
project "Solaris Joka Phase-1". Nevertheless, it is true that we are
presently residing at Flat No. 4D, Tower-16, Genexx Valley, Joka, Kolkata, as
fully disclosed in the cause title of the Complaint and the Evidence on
Affidavit. Our present residence neither diminishes nor extinguishes our
contractual and statutory rights arising out of the Agreement for Sale which is
the subject matter of this proceeding.
Reply to Question No. 15
Question:
I put it to you that both in the Complaint and in the Affidavit-of-Evidence you
have made deliberate incorrect statements on oath. What do you say?
Answer:
The suggestion is
emphatically denied.
Every statement made
in the Consumer Complaint as well as in the Evidence on Affidavit has been made
truthfully, bona fide and on the basis of our personal knowledge,
contemporaneous records and documentary evidence. The allegations contained in
the question are false, baseless, malicious and intended to avoid the
contractual liabilities of the Opposite Parties.
Reply to Question No. 16
Question:
I put to you that you have not stated the correct state of affairs either in
the Complaint or in the Affidavit-of-Evidence. What do you say?
Answer:
The suggestion is
wholly denied.
The Complaint and the
Evidence on Affidavit disclose the complete and correct facts relevant for
adjudication of the present dispute. Every material fact has been supported by
documentary evidence already produced before this Hon'ble Commission. No
material fact has been suppressed, concealed or misrepresented by us.
Reply to Question No. 17
Question:
I put to you that you have filed the instant case only to harass the Opposite
Party No.1 and 2. What do you say?
Answer:
The suggestion is
false and denied.
The present Consumer
Complaint has been instituted solely for enforcement of our lawful contractual
and statutory rights after repeated requests, correspondence, issuance of legal
notice and prolonged failure on the part of the Opposite Parties to deliver
possession and execute the Deed of Conveyance despite receipt of the entire
sale consideration and other charges. The proceedings have been initiated bona
fide and for obtaining legitimate reliefs under the Consumer Protection Act,
2019.
Reply to Question No. 18
Question:
I put to you that you are not entitled to get the reliefs sought by you against
the Opposite Party No.1 and 2. What do you say?
Answer:
The suggestion is
denied.
We are legally and
factually entitled to all the reliefs claimed in the Consumer Complaint.
Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 are confirming and consenting parties to the
Agreement for Sale, are owners of the project land and are jointly and
severally liable for performance of the contractual obligations. Their
liability is evident from the contractual documents and the applicable
provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Reply to Question No. 19
Question:
I put it to you that you are not entitled to get any compensation from the
Opposite Party No.1 and 2. What do you say?
Answer:
The suggestion is
specifically denied.
Because of the
prolonged delay in handing over possession, failure to execute and register the
Deed of Conveyance, wrongful retention of our money and the continuous
harassment and mental agony suffered by us, we are legally entitled to
appropriate compensation under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The quantum
of such compensation shall be determined by this Hon'ble Commission on appreciation
of the evidence on record.
Reply to Question No. 20
Question:
I put it to you that you are not entitled to get any cost from the Opposite
Party No.1 and 2. What do you say?
Answer:
The suggestion is
denied.
We have been
compelled to initiate the present proceedings solely because of the unlawful
acts, omissions and continuing defaults committed by the Opposite Parties. We
have incurred substantial expenses towards legal proceedings, court expenses,
legal notices and professional charges. We are therefore entitled to recover
litigation costs from the Opposite Parties in accordance with law and subject
to the discretion of this Hon'ble Commission.
Reply to Question No. 21
Question:
I put to you that the
complaint is not maintainable as such you are not a consumer of the Opposite
Party No. 1 and 2. What do you say?
Answer:
The suggestion is wholly false,
baseless, misconceived and is emphatically denied.
We state that the present Consumer
Complaint is perfectly maintainable both in law and on facts. We are
"consumers" within the meaning of Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019,
having hired and availed of housing construction and allied services for
consideration under the Agreement for Sale dated 02.05.2022,
which was executed not only by the Developer but also by Opposite Party Nos. 1
and 2 as the landowners and confirming/consenting parties.
Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 are not
strangers to the transaction. They are the owners of the land forming the
subject matter of the housing project, actively authorised the development and
sale of the project, executed and confirmed the Agreement for Sale, and enabled
the Developer to transfer valuable rights in our favour. The contractual
obligations undertaken by them are inseparable from those of the Developer, and
they are jointly and severally liable for due performance of the Agreement,
including delivery of possession, execution and registration of the Deed of
Conveyance and completion of all obligations undertaken thereunder.
The plea that Opposite Party Nos. 1
and 2 are merely landowners and therefore outside the purview of the Consumer
Protection Act is legally untenable. Once they voluntarily became confirming
and consenting parties to the Agreement for Sale and derived benefits from the project
developed on their land, they assumed corresponding contractual and legal
obligations towards the purchasers. Their liability cannot be avoided by
describing themselves merely as landowners.
Further, the Consumer Protection Act,
2019 provides an additional and beneficial statutory remedy to consumers
against all persons responsible for deficiency in service and unfair trade
practice. The maintainability of the present complaint is therefore fully
supported by the contractual documents executed by the parties, the admitted
status of Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 as landowners and confirming parties, and
the documentary evidence already produced before this Hon'ble Commission.
Accordingly, we reiterate that the
present complaint is fully maintainable against Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2,
and the objection raised by them is frivolous, vexatious and liable to be
rejected.
3.
That
save and except what has been specifically stated hereinabove, all other
suggestions, implications or inferences contrary to the records and documents
are denied.
4.
That
the above replies are true and correct to our knowledge, based upon records
maintained by us and legal advice received, and are made without prejudice to
our rights and contentions in the Consumer Complaint.
DEPONENTS
Verification
We,
the above named Deponents, do hereby verify that the statements made in
paragraphs 1 to 4 hereinabove and the replies furnished to Question Nos. 1 to 21
are true to our knowledge, derived from records maintained by us and believed
to be true upon legal advice received. Nothing material has been concealed
therefrom.
Verified
at Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, on this ___ day of __________, 2026.
DEPONENTS
Identified by me,
Advocate
No comments:
Post a Comment