Written version for and on behalf of the Opposite Party

 

DISTRICT: SOUTH 24 PGS. 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SOUTH 24 PGS. BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700144 

 

C. C. NO. 141 OF 2024 

 

IN THE MATTER OF :- 

 

Sri. Rakhal Chandra Nath 

…………Complainant 

-VS- 

 

M/S Abhiraj Villa 

 

Represented by it's partners namely 

 

(i) Debabrata Sharma 

(ii) Anish Chowdhury 

…..…....Opposite Party 

 

Written version for and on behalf of the Opposite Party abovenamed-

 

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH :- 

 

1.           That the complainant filed the complaint in respect of possession letter and completion certificate so far the contents of the complain. 

 

2.           That previously the complainant made a development agreement being Deed No. 566/2016 and complainant also executed a registered development power of attorney in favour of Debabrata Sharma herein the Partner No. 1 and subsequently said Development agreement was cancel Vide Deed no. 5330/2017 and said Power of Attorney was also cancel Vide cancelation Deed No. 4409/2017 and thereafter entered into fresh development agreement dated 12/08/2017 being no. 6614/2017 and executed a fresh power of attorney being no. 6017/2017 in favour of the Opposite Parties. 

 

3.           That on the very date one supplementary agreement for development of land along with power of attorney was also made between the parties and which was duly executed before the Sarbani Mitra notary Gov. of India and accordingly notarial certificate has been issued on 12/08/2017 from where it reveals the complainant acknowledge that he has received total amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Two Lac) in two installment like Rs. 1,00,000/- (One Lac) cash on 22/01/2016 and another 1,00,000/- (One Lac) received by cheque no. 649370 of Axis Bank on the day of execution of power of attorney and the complainant further agreed the said amount to be refund in favour of the developer when the developer will provide possession to the owner but surprisingly inspite of having possession the owner's allocation portion of the development agreement the clever complainant tried to evaded to refund the said amount in favour of the developer herein the O.P. and accordingly the dispute has been arised (the copy of said supplementary agreement is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-I). 

 

4.           That it is last but not the least so many extra works has been done by the Opposite Parties as per requirement of the complainant in the said owner's allocation portion than others flat of the building moreover the complainant receive Rs. 35,000/- on 22-10-2022 for further works in the said owner's allocation according to his choice like 15,000/- by Cheque no. 000277 for aluminum channel and Rs. 20,000/- cash for repairing wall and without any hesitation the Opposite Party given to the said amount to the complainant and complainant also received the said amount and issued a money receipt by acknowledging the same on 22-10-2022 so the question of extra work done by the complainant does not arise at all (the copy of said money receipt is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-II) 

 

It is Pertinent to mention if any Extra work beyond the op consent and development agreement is done by the complainant for which opposite parties is not responsible for the sain.

 

5.           That further the complainant also occupied one garage in the ground floor of the building and kept the same under lock and key with the complainant did not disclose in the instant complaint and on this ground also the instant complaint should be dismissed for suppression of fact. 

 

6.           That the owner's allocation portion and the entire building has been completed but as the complainant change and alter the owner's allocation portion according to his choice so revise sanction plan is also needed and expenses of the same also to be procured but the clever complainant neither pay any charges of extra works, charges of meter and charges of mother meter etc. nor refund the refundable price what he is bound to refund for which the Opposite Parties is suffering from considerable financial stress but the Opposite Parties has no option to come before this commission for redress hence found no other alternative the opposite parties approach before the civil Judge Senior Division and filed suit against the complaint one being money suit no.121 of 2023 and another Title Suit no. 297 of 2023 and both suits are pending for ad-Judication (the copy of money receipt of mother meter is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-III). 

 

7.           That clever complainant only to save his back from the said suit and with a hope that if he would come to the Hon'ble commission the Opposite Parties will be punished soon and as such he filed this complaint without coming clean and fair hand and suppression the real fact. 

 

8.           That the prayer of the complainant in nut sell is that he want to possession letter from the O.P. and here the Opposite Parties never denied to issue the same rather till now ready to issue the possession letter in favour of the complainant subject to condition of the refund the refundable price of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Two Lac) and charges of meter and mother meter and payment of charges of extra work amount of Rs. 4,32,650/- (Four Lac Thirty Two Thousand Six Hundred fifty) only but the intention of the complainant to deceive the O.P. hence the contents of Page no. 6 of Para no. 7 and Page no. 7 of the complaint is crystal clear the evil intention of the complainant hence inspite of several persuasion from the side of the Opposite Parties and intervention of the local club where the complainant himself was a president the complainant evaded the matter only to grab the money of the Opposite parties and took shelter before this Hon'ble Commission to take undue advantage which is not maintainable nor permissible in the eye of law (the copy of statement by the intervention of the local club is annexed herewith and Marked as Annexure-IV). 

 

9.           That the opposite party relying the above contention beg to reply on 

merit as follows:- 

 

 i.            for that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable 

either in law or in facts and in other word the case is not maintainable in its 

present form; 

 

ii.            for that in reply the opposite party denies false and frivolous allegatio as label by the complainant in his complaint which is not fall within tl purview of C.P.Act and the complainant is put to strict proof thereof; 

 

iii.            for that in reply the opposite party states that there is no cause of actio has been arise to file the instant case and the complainant did not clarify th reason in his complaint so instant case should be dismiss on this ground also 

 

iv.            for that in reply the opposite party denies the claim of the complainant as the same has no basis in the eye of law and the complainant well established himself that he is a greedy person by nature nothing else. 

 

v.            for that in reply the opposite party states that the complainant is not entitle to get any claim as prayed as there is no negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. 

 

vi.            for that in reply the opposite party states that the acts of the opposite party is bonafided and not fall within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (As amended up to date); 

 

vii.            for that in reply the opposite party states that there is no fault imperfection shortcoming to the customer in the manner in relation to deliver the completion certificate hence it is not fall within the expression“ unfair trade practice” as defined in Section 2 (i) (h) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the part of the opposite party ; 

 

viii.            for that in reply the opposite party states that there is also no fault "restrictive trade practice" as defined in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; more over the complainant did not supply any documents regarding his claim here written version is filed without persuing the documents of the complainant as such O.P. craves to file further w.v. in future if necessary.

 

ix.            for that in reply the opposite party states that in view of the above facts and circumstances the complaint filed by the complainant is liable to be dismissed. 

 

10.        That the opposite party in view of the above facts and circumstances prays for dismissed of the case with exemplary cost. 

 

It is therefore prayed that your Honour would graciously be pleased to admit/ accept the written version and considering the facts and circumstances the case be dismissed with exemplary cost. 

 

And for this act of kindness the opposite party as in duty bound shall ever pray.