Order no. 4

Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present.

Ld. Advocate of the opposite party no.6/petitioner is present and files rejoinder on affidavit. Copy served.

The Misc. Application dated 23.11.2023 filed by the opposite party no.6/petitioner along with its rejoinder is taken up for hearing.

Perused. Considered. Heard both side.

Ld. Advocate for the opposite party no.6/petitioner submits that there is no cause of action to file the complaint case. Moreover, the same is barred by limitation. It is also alleged that there is no relationship of service providing between the complainant and opposite party no.6/petitioner. As such the complaint case is not maintainable in law in its present form and liable to be dismissed.

In reply Ld. Advocate for the complainant raised strong objection against the prayer of opposite party no.6/petitioner. He submits that the complainant entered into an Agreement for Sale on 18.03.2015 with the erstwhile land owner of the suit property. In order to purchase a flat measuring about 513 sq. ft. super built up area on the first floor of premises no.113, Kabi Guru Sarani, P.S.- Behala, Kolkata, at a consideration of Rs.8,75,000/- (Rupees eight lakh seventy five thousand) only. Inspite of the payment of the consideration amount, till date he has not received the possession of the flat mentioned above. According to the complainant, in the meantime opposite party no.6/petitioner has purchased the entire suit premises from the erstwhile land owners. Therefore opposite party no.6/petitioner is a necessary party in the complaint case no.CC/01/2022.

On perusal of the material on record we find that there is cause of action to file the complaint case and the same is not barred by limitation as the subject of the case relates to the service ‘Housing Construction’. It is admitted fact that the un-registered Agreement for Sale between the complainant and erstwhile land owners was executed on 18.03.2015. Thereafter opposite party no.6/petitioner has purchased the entire suit property.

Considering the fact, in our considered view opposite party no.6/petitioner is a necessary party in complaint case no.CC/01/2022 and all the issues raised by opposite party no.6/petitioner in the instant Misc. Application is required to be adjudicated on the basis of evidence of both sides in CC/01/2022.

Having considered the discussion made above we are of the opinion that Misc. Application dated 23.11.2023 is devoid of any merit is liable to be rejected.

Hence, it is

O R D E R E D

that the Misc. Application dated 23.11.2023 is dismissed on contest with cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) only.