HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT MANDAL, PRESIDENT            

This is to consider a Complaint Case U/s 34(1) read with Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (in short the Act) filed by the complainants praying for delivery of khas possession of the owners’ allocation of the complainants as mentioned in the Schedule A & B of the Petition of complaint and to pay compensation and damages etc.

          The fact of the Complaint case is that the complainants, OPs no.5 and Prasanta Roy, predecessor of OPs No. 6 and 7 being co-owners of land had entered into a Development Agreement on 19.8.2016 with the OP no.1 /Construction Firm represented by OP nos. 2 ,3 and 4 for raising construction of the building. Accordingly, land owners executed a registered Power of Attorney in favour of OPs no. 2, 3 and 4 authorizing them to raise construction. The non-fulfilment of the said promise as per the agreement led the complainants to lodge this Complainant case before this Commission. The complainants have prayed for passing an order directing the OP NO. 1 to 4 to deliver the possession of owners’ allocation as mentioned in the Schedule A & B to the complaint and to pay damages and compensation etc.

It transpires from the Petition of complaint that the complainants have valued the Complaint at Rs. 55,13,335/- (Rupees fifty five lakh thirteen thousand three hundred thirty five) only . It also transpires from the E- Assessment slip issued by the Directorate of Registration and Stamp Revenue, Government of West Bengal that the value of the total land was Rs. 55,13,335/- (Rupees fifty five lakh thirteen thousand three hundred thirty five) only and the complainants are two owners among other co-owners.

          On careful perusal of the Petition of complaint it appears that the complainants have filed this Complaint Case and they have sought for relief for their portion only and they have prayed for enforcement of the agreement so far it relates to them. This being the situation, the valuation of the instant Complaint case should have been done for their undivided portion only but in this case they have showed the valuation of the whole property which includes other co-sharers who are not seeking any reliefs before us.

          Under this facts and circumstances, we think that within the ambit of the C.P. Act this Complaint case does not come within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission since this Commission will now have jurisdiction for valuation of Rs. 50 lakhs  to  Rs. 2 crores.

          Thus on consideration of the facts as disclosed by the materials placed before us and the matter applicable to this case, we are of the opinion that this Commission have no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the Petition of complaint filed by the complainants.

          In the result, the Petition of complaint be and the same is returned to the filing Advocate of the Complainants for presenting the same before the proper Commission.

          The Complaint case is thus disposed of accordingly.