HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL, PRESIDENT

1. This is a complaint case under section 47 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 filed by Pallav Rohatgi. The complainant has filed the instant complaint case praying for the following reliefs :-

“a) Direction upon the O.P. Nos. 3 and 4 to return total expenses of Rs.68,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Eight Lakh Only) included with the consideration money, the expenses of registration, registration fees of deed and the stamp duty cost paid by the Complainant along with an interest @13% per annum from the date of registration of deed of sale dated 24.08.2023 till the date of realization, by cancelling the registered deed of sale dated 29.08.2023;

b) Direction upon the O.P. nos. 1,2,3 and 4 jointly pay compensation to the complainant for damages to a tune of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Only) caused to the complainant towards their tremendous harassments, mental agony, breach of peace etc.;

c) Direction upon the opposite party nos. 3 and 4 to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only towards the litigation cost;

d) Such further order or orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.”

2. Heard the Learned Advocate appearing for the complainant at length. Perused the petition of complaint and the documents annexed with the petition of complaint. To prove the case the complainant has filed a photocopy of Agreement for Sale dated 27/02/2023 and a photocopy of Deed of Sale dated 24/08/2023. The said photocopy of Agreement for Sale dated 27/02/2023 and the photocopy of Deed of Sale dated 24/08/2023 disclose that the complainant and the opposite parties entered into an Agreement for Sale on 27/02/2023 for one self contained 3 BHK residential flat being No. 3A on the 3^rd Floor measuring Including Super built up area 1470 sq. ft. more or less, consisting of three Bed Rooms, one Puja Room, one Living /Dining cum Kitchen, two Toilets as shown in the map annexed to the said copy of Deed of Sale and therein bordered in ‘RED’ colour. As per the said Agreement for Sale the complainant purchased the said self contained flat on 24/08/2023. Therefore, it appears from the said Deed of Sale dated 24/08/2023 that the complainant paid Rs.64,00,000/- (Rupees sixty four lakh only) to the N.K. Realtors, the opposite party No. 4 for purchase of the said flat towards consideration money.

3. It also appears from the copy of the said Agreement for Sale that the complainant is in possession of the said self contained flat and the opposite party No. 4 handed over the same to the complainant and the complainant took the possession of the said ready flat.

4. Under these facts and circumstances, it appears to me that the agreement was executed for sale of a ready flat and accordingly the sale was done on the basis of the said agreement. There is no housing construction or development work involved in the matter. There is nothing but an Agreement for Sale of a ready flat and the sale was executed on the basis of the said Agreement for Sale. Therefore, the case is related to the simplicitor sale. This is nothing but an attempt of a self contained flat related to the simplicitor sale and the complainant cannot be treated as a ‘consumer’ under section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and the opposite party is also not a service provider. The relationship between the complainant and the opposite parties is simply termed as purchaser and seller. The dispute is not a consumer dispute. The complainant has not availed any service as per the provision of section 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

5. In Ganeshlal Vs. Shyam reported in (2014) 14 SCC 773, Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that :-

“Where a sale of plot of land simplicitor is concerned, and if there is any complaint, the same would not be covered under the Consumer Protection Act.”

6. In Brig. Davinder Singh Grewal and Anr. –Vs- R.S. Real Estate and Anr. reported in Volume III (2017) CPJ 304 (NC) Hon’ble National Commission has observed thus :

“In the instant case, it is manifestly clear that the agreement entered between the parties related to purchase of agricultural land, for which payment was made by the complainants to the OP sellers and a registered agreement as well as sale-deed were also executed. The OPs were supposed to provide a pucca passage to the said land and to deliver the possession after 42 months of the agreement. It is clear that the said activity does not fall under any item in the definition of ‘service’ as per Section 2(0) of the Act.”

7. In view of the above decision and looking to the contents of the Deed of Agreement for Sale dated 24/08/2023 and the Agreement for Sale dated 27/02/2023 executed between the parties, it appears that the transaction between the parties is simply sale transaction. Therefore, the complainant is not a ‘consumer’ under section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and the opposite parties are not service provider under section 2(6) and 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Therefore, in view of the discussion above, it may be concluded that the case is not maintainable in law and is liable to be dismissed.

8. In the result, the complaint case be and the same is dismissed without being admitted.

9. The complaint case is, thus, disposed of accordingly.