Dt. of filing- 25/06/2018

Dt. of Judgement- 21/08/2019

Mrs. Sashi Kala Basu, Hon’ble President.

          This consumer complaint  is filed by Samit Mukherjee under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite Parties namely The Alchemist infra Realty limited having  its Branch Office  at  6A,  Ballygunge Terrace Road and  Alchemist Infra Realty  Limited having  branch office at 15, Ganesh Chandra Venue , alleging  deficiency in service on their part.

           Case of the complainant in short is that on the basis of application submitted by the complainant  expressing his interest   to acquire plot measuring  about 1762.20 Kanal at Behanta & Tila Tehsil Kolars, District Shivpuri, Madhya Pradesh  a specific allotment no. AIRL/RX00032046  dated 11.10.2012 was issued  to the complainant  by the OP. In the offer letter it was provided that on completion of tenure, entire amount as of Rs. 1,00,000/- only against the investment for the allotment  would be refunded. It is further case of the complainant that SEBI  by an order dated 14^th June, 2016 directed the Alchemist Group of Companies  to refund the amount  collected  by them  from the investors.  The order passed by the SEBI was also affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court but the OP flouted the order of SEBI and the money has not been refunded to the investors including  the complainant. The complainant  visited the office of the OPs  for the money  as assured to be refunded, but all in vain. So the present case has been filed by the complainant for directing the OPs  to pay the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as mentioned  in the allotment letter dated 11.10.2012 along with   interest  @18% , to pay compensation  of Rs. 3,00,000/-  and litigation cost of Rs. 50,000/-.

          On perusal of the record it appears that OPs  did not take any step inspite of  the service of the notice, So, case proceeded  exparte.

          So, the only point require determination is :-

          Whether the complainant  is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons

          In order to substantiate  his claim,  complainant has filed  a copy of the Certificate of Property being allotment no. AIRL/RX00032046 dated 01.11.2012.  It is submitted that the  original  of the said  certificate has been submitted before the company  on 04.09.2015. However, on perusal of the photocopy of  certificate of property /allotment letter, it appears that an indenture has been executed  between the company and the Certificate Holder  on 11.10.2012  to sell  land measuring an area of  1762.20 Kanal. But no such indenture  executed between the parties, is filed by the complainant  in this case. Said allotment letter also reveals that an  amount  of Rs.1,00,000/-  has been paid by the complainant /Certificate Holder. It is strange that  not only the  indenture for sale as reflected in the  said allotment letter has been  filed  but also there is no reflection  in the complaint petition about the plot of land  as agreed, being not  handed over to the complainant, by the OP Company. Present complaint is  filed purely for directing the OP to pay the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-.  But the execution of indenture for sale indicates there was agreement to sell a plot by the OP  on its development. So complainant had allegedly hired  the service of OP  to develop the plot  of land. If it was  purely for  recovery of money, case would not fall under the Provisions of the  Consumer Protection Act.  Be that as it may, question before the forum is whether  the  complainant is entitled to relief  in the given fact and situation of this case.  On a careful  scrutiny of the complaint petition,  it appears   that an order has  already been passed by SEBI on 14^th June, 2016 directing the company to refund the money to the investors including the complainant. According to the own case of the complainant, company had also moved  before the Hon’ble Supreme Court  but the order  of the SEBI has been affirmed. According  to complainant  since the order  passed by SEBI to refund the amount has not been complied, the present  complaint  has been filed, which suggests that this complaint has been filed in order to  execute the order passed by the SEBI. It is the specific  claim   of the complainant in paragraph – 13 of the complaint that cause of action arose on the date of  order passed by the SEBI and subsequent  when it has  not been  complied. It need not be mentioned here that the  SEBI  is a statutory body and so entitled to  execute  its own order. It is settled law that  a Statutory Body, Court  or a   Forum  passing the  order,  can only execute its own order. Moreover many investment/certificate  holders had moved before the  SEBI and accordingly order has been passed by the SEBI. There  is no separate  order passed only in favour of the complainant. So if  according  to complainant it was a common order for all the investors,   complainant  ought to have moved before the SEBI.  So, in such a situation, complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable   and ,thus, liable to be dismissed.

Hence,

                         Ordered

          CC/377/2018 is dismissed exparte.