| Complaint Case No. CC/199/2021 | | ( Date of Filing : 19 Aug 2021 ) |
| | | | 1. Shri Arijit De | | S/o Sri Ajit Kumar De, 12B, Shanti Ghosh Street, P.O. - Bagbazar, P.S. - Shyampukur, Kolkata - 700003. |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. M/s. Amarnath Construction and 4 others | | 17, Peskar Lane, Salkia, P.S. - Golabari, Pin - 711106. | | Howrah | | 2. Sm. Nupur Bose, Partner of M/s. Amarnath Construction | | 17, Peskar Lane, Salkia, P.S. - Golabari, Pin - 711106. | | Howrah | | 3. Shri Niren Bose, Partner of M/s. Amarnath Construction | | S/o Late Narendra Kumar Bose, Sreedhar Apartment, 38/5, Bagbazar Street, P.S. - Shyampukur, Kolkata - 700003. | | 4. Sm. Shanta Banerjee | | W/o Shri Amitava Banerjee, Sreedhar Apartment, 38/5, Bagbazar Street, P.S. - Shyampukur, Kolkata - 700003. | | 5. Shri Nilotpal Banerjee | | S/o Shri Amitava Banerjee, Sreedhar Apartment, 38/5, Bagbazar Street, P.S. - Shyampukur, Kolkata - 700003. |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | Order No.8 Date: 26.04.2022 Today fix for passing necessary order on the point of maintainability. None present on behalf of Complainant and Ld. Counsel for the O.P. No.-1 and 2 is present. Opposite Party/Petitioner stated in his petition that the complainant enter into an agreement for sale for purchasing a car parking space on the ground floor of the premises no. 38/5, Bag Bazar Street, P.S.-Shyampukur, Kolkata – 700003 and it does not involve any housing construction and it is a out and out agreement for sale. As it is not involved a housing construction, hence, it is not within the purview of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Violation of terms of agreement for sale that is by not executing sale deed as per agreement for sale by the vendor is a clear violation of contract between the parties. If any of the party of a contract violate the terms of the contract, the other party of the contract has always right to file a case for specific performance of contract. In my view, Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has established for violation of terms of the Consumer Protection Act. As because there is no deficiency of service which is rendered by the opposite party. It is a simply violation of terms of the contract. Hence, in my view, this complaint case is not maintainable in its present form. Complainant files this case in a wrong forum. So, it is not maintainable. Hence, it is ORDERED that the complaint case is dismissed and it is not maintainable and petition of maintainability filed by the opposite party is allowed without any cost. | |
