Order No.07

Today is fixed for order on MA/223/2022.

We have vetted the material on record and given consideration to the submission advanced by the Ld. Advocates on both sides for and against the prayer.

By filing the aforesaid MA, the OPs have wanted to say that the case does not come within the ambit of unfair trade practice and that the consideration paid long before the date of agreement is no consideration in the eye of law and therefore, the case is liable to be dismissed. But Section 7(I, II) offers a clarification on this point. Consideration paid long before the date of agreement also brings the person paying the said consideration within the ambit of consumer. Therefore, one of the point taken by the Ld. Advocate in support of his application becomes unimpressive.

Apart from unlawful trade practice, deficiency or defects in the goods or service also come within the purview of this Act and the complainant has alleged that deficiency in rendering service on the part of the OPs has led the complainant to this Commission. The second point taken by the Ld. Advocate also becomes fragile. The petition seeking dismissal of the case mainly on the aforesaid two grounds therefore, calls for no action and hence rejected.

The MA/223/2022 is thus disposed of.

Another point which surfaces from the record is whether the flat which the complainant agreed to purchase was a ready-build one or was under construction. It is settled principle of law that an agreement for sale of ready-build flat does not come within the ambit of the Act.

As such, 24.03.2023 is fixed for the Ld. Advocates on both sides on this point.