MR. SHYAMAL KUMAR GHOSH,   MEMBER

The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant challenging the order impugned dated 17/04/2023 passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Kolkata, Unit – IV in connection with the consumer case being no-CC/52/2023 wherein the Ld. Trial Commission concerned has been pleased to hold that the complainant is not a ‘Consumer’ under section- 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and accordingly the instant case is liable to be dismissed being not maintainable. Resultantly the instant CC case has been dismissed, being not admitted. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with such order impugned, the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant praying for setting aside the aforesaid order impugned dated 17/04/2023.

At the time of hearing, ld. Advocate appearing for the complainant/appellant has urged that the legal status of the appellant /complainant is a consumer as per provision of section-2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The respondent/sole opposite party is a firm dealing in the business of selling and plotting of the land for the purpose of construction of residential flats/buildings. Ld advocate also argued that the complainant/appellant has intended to purchase the land and to that effect the parties have entered into an agreement for sale dated 03/06/2003 in respect of purchasing said land at a consideration amount of Rs.2,35,000/- only. It has also been submitted that prior to the execution of the agreement for sale, the complainant/appellant has paid Rs.35,000/- only to the op/respondent as an advance on 23/02/2003 and thereafter he has further paid Rs.2,00,000/- only to the op/respondent on 03/06/2003. After receiving the full consideration amount, the op/respondent has failed to execute and register the deed of conveyance in favour of the complainant/appellant till date. On several occasions the complainant/appellant has made requests the op/respondent to comply with the terms and conditions of the aforesaid agreement for sale, but the op/respondent did not pay any heed in the aforesaid event causing clear gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of op/respondent. Ld. Advocate appearing for the complainant/appellant has further added that without going into the merit of the case, ld. Trial commission has been pleased to decide that the complainant is not a ‘consumer’ and he does not come well within the purview of the definition of the ‘consumer’ in pursuant to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Ultimately the matter has been dismissed being not admitted. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with such order impugned, the appellant/complainant has preferred the instant appeal before this Commission and accordingly the ld. Advocate has prayed for setting aside the order impugned dated 17/04/2023 passed by the ld. Trial Commission.

We have heard the ld. advocate appearing for the appellant/complainant on the point of admission at length and in full.

We have considered the submission of the ld. advocate.

We have meticulously perused all materials available on record.

Having heard the ld. Advocate appearing for the complainant/appellant, we realize that if we decide only one point whether the complainant/appellant comes well within the purview of the definition of the ‘consumer’ or not as per provision of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 we can safely come into conclusion of the aforesaid appeal preferred by the complainant/appellant.

We have carefully perused the agreement for sale dated 03/06/2003 wherefrom it appears to us that Sri Jagannath Sardar hereinafter referred to as a Purchaser has entered into aforesaid agreement with the vendor viz. Ananda Developers proprietor of Sri Anada Sardar in respect of Land measuring about 51.65 decimals. This agreement also reveals that the opposite party/vendor has agreed to sell the plot of land to the complainant/purchaser at a total consideration amount of Rs.2,35,000/- only and the said op/vendor would be bound to handover the vacant land to the complainant/purchaser on the execution and registration of the deed of conveyance.

From the aforesaid discussions, it is crystal clear to us that there is neither such story of hiring service nor the story of the development work/works done by the op/developer/vendor in the aforesaid agreement for sale. The fact reveals that a ready vacant plot was supposed to be handed over to the complainant/purchaser and the aforesaid fact does not certainly come well within the purview of the definition of the ‘Consumer’ as per Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

In pursuant to the above observations, we think that the ld. Trial Commission has correctly opined that the complainant is not a consumer under section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and it is a case relating to the simplicitor sale which does not come well within the purview of the C.P. Act 2019.

Upon careful observations, we think that there is no such error, mistake, wrong or any irregularity in passing the order impugned dated 17/04/2023 passed by the ld. Trial Commission and accordingly we are not in a position to interfere with the order impugned dated 17/04/2023.

Keeping in view of the above observations, we are constrained to dismiss the instant appeal against the sole respondent/op without any order as to costs at the stage of admission hearing.

The instant appeal stands dismissed at the admission stage and accordingly the same is disposed of.

Note in the register.