Order-9.

AUTHOR.SHRI RABIDEB MUKHOPADHYAY, MEMBER

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986. The complainant stated that he being a soldier of Indian Air Force was approached by OP-1 being Developer by profession for purchase of a land to be developed by OP-1 in Kolkata which was to be completed by 15/3/2014 from the date of Agreement on payment of money.

        The complainant stated that he was satisfied by all aspects and paid to OP-1 with an Affidavit as following.

        i) DD No. 158428 dated 26/4/2013 for Rs 111000/-

        ii) DD No. 158428 (should have been 158787) dated 24/5/2013 for Rs 107122/-

       iii) DD No. 581190 dated 20/7/2013 (Date should have been 29/7/2013) for Rs 107122.26

       iv) DD No. 583111 dated 29/8/2013 for Rs 107122.26.

        The complainant stated that though the scheduled property was to be delivered by 15/3/2014 and though allocation letter dated was issued as well as Money Receipts, OP-1 failed and neglected to do so by 2015.

        The complainant stated that he paid the amounts by way of deductions from his monthly salary  and he took loan from OP-2 but the OP-1 like a Chit Fund escaped. It is also stated that he paid Rs 646611.29 deducted from salary by OP-2 in favour of OP-1 from monthly salary, so both OP-1 and OP-2 failed and neglected to perform their liabilities.

        The complainant stated at para-8 of complaint that OP-1 worked under OP-2 and it is bound by OP-2 to search out OP-1 and recover the liabilities due to the complainant.

        The complainant prayed for direction upon OPs to return Rs 646611.29, Rs 1000000/- as compensation and litigation cost of Rs 10000/-.

Points for Decision

1. Whether the complaint is maintainable and the complainant is a consumer under the OPs;
2. Whether the OPs are deficient ;
3. Whether the complainant deserves relief.

Decision with Reasons

        1) We have perused all the documents filed by the complainant including the Money Receipts, copies of Demand Drafts sent to OP-1, Copy of the Affidavit affirmed by the complainant and copy of the Allocation letter. We understood the merit of the case from furnished documents keeping aside some errors committed by the complainant in the complaint.

        2) The OP-1 did not turn up to contest the case.

        3) Most importantly, OP-2 sent two letters in response to the summons sent to it. Letter no. AHE/454/1/370/Org (Lgl) dated 28 Dec 2017 while returning the Complaint Application stated that the Application had been erroneously sent to it by this Forum and it has been stated in the letter that the Director, Col. Rakesh Rana is allegedly working in Indian Army. It is said in the letter that it is clear that Air Force is not connected with the present case in any manner.

        4) The OP-2 while returning the petition intimated in letter no. 201535/1/A1(DV-3)  dated 05 Jan 2018 that the said officer (Rakesh Rana, OP-1) is not borne on the strength of this HQ/Not posted in the HQ. It is also stated in the said letter that further communication, if any, may be made with OP-1.

        5) So, it transpires the office of OP-1 is located in New Delhi (who did not attend proceedings) being beyond our jurisdiction and the OP-2 is no how connected with the instant case as per two letters sent to this Forum by OP-2.

        6) This could not have been understood unless OP-2 had sent the letters. We relied upon the complainant’s version that we have jurisdiction believing that OP-1 is connected with OP-2 but such belief has been broken after obtaining the letters from OP-2. So, It is clear that OP-1 is beyond our jurisdiction and OP-2 has no connection with the case.

        7) It is also clear that had the complainant lodged the case on the basis of cause of action (site of land promised), it could have been admitted by the appropriate Forum but that has not been done.

        8) From above discussions, it is crystal clear that if we proceed with the case, it would be a jurisdictional error which we cannot commit, whatever be the merit of the case.

        So, in the circumstances of such discussions, we have no other alternative but to pass

                                                         ORDER

        That the complaint be and the same is dismissed due to lack of Jurisdiction of this Forum;

        That the complainant shall have the liberty to lodge the complaint with the Forum of appropriate Jurisdiction subject to limitation and other formalities.

        Let copy of this order be given to the complainant when applied for.