West Bengal

Howrah

CC/182/2024

SRI SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Asst. General Manager, Union Bank of India - Opp.Party(s)

26 Sep 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HOWRAH
20, Round Tank Lane, P.O. and P.S. Howrah, Dist. Howrah-711 101.
Office (033) 2638 0892, 0512 Confonet (033) 2638 0512 Fax (033) 2638 0892
 
Complaint Case No. CC/182/2024
( Date of Filing : 18 Sep 2024 )
 
1. SRI SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA
S/o. Sri Pawan Kumar Sharma 17, Dr. Raj Kumar Kundu Lane, Shibtala, beside Aloka Cinema, P.O. Ramkrishnapur, P.S.- Shibpur, Howrah-711102
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Asst. General Manager, Union Bank of India
Asset Recovery Branch Office at Yamuna Bhawan, 1st floor, 55/5B, Ezra Street, P.O.- Burra Bazar, P.S.- Hare Street, Kolkata-700001 Earlier address- 14/1B, Ezra Street, Kolkata-700001
2. Union Bank of India
Office at Yamuna Bhawan, 1st floor, 55/5B, Exra Street, P.O.- Burra Bazar, P.S.- Hare Street, Kolkata-700001 Previous address:- 14/1B, Ezra Street, Kolkata-700001
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Debasish Bandyopadhyay PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Dhiraj Kumar Dey MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Minakshi Chakraborty MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 26 Sep 2024
Final Order / Judgement

Order No:  2                                                                                        Date:26/09/2024

Today is fixed for further admission hearing. Nobody appears on behalf of the complainant on call when the case is taken up for hearing.

However, when we go through the complaint petition, we find that the contention of the complainant is that the complainant has purchased a property from the O.p. no.1 through an E-Auction and paid the total consideration of Rs.35,10,000/-. But the O.p.-Bank failed to give possession and hand over the property or returned the total consideration amount to the complainant for which the complainant filed this complaint praying possession of the purchase property or returned of Rs.35,10,000/- together with 18% interest thereon from April, 2023 and compensation.

At this position, we have taken the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in U.T. Chandigarh Administration & anr Vs Amarjeet Singh & Ors., Civil Appeal No.1994 of 2006, (2009) 4 SCC 660, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has opined that:

“14. ………….With reference to a public auction of existing sites (as contrasted from sites to be ‘formed’), the purchaser/lessee is not a consumer, the owner is not a ‘trader’ or ‘service provider’ and the grievance does not relate to any matter in regard which a complaint can be filed. Therefore, any grievance by the purchaser/lessee will not give rise to a complaint or consumer dispute and the fora under the Act will not have jurisdiction to entertain or decide any complaint by the auction purchaser/lessee against the owner holding the auction of sites.”    [Emphasis supplied]

Similar opinion has been found in the judgment passed by the Hon’ble N.C.D.R.C. passed in Revision Petition No.1931 of 2017.

So, in our opinion, in this instant case there is no matter involved in this auction process which could be termed as “service”, and the auction purchaser is not a consumer who can take shelter under the C.P. Act, 2019.

Under this condition, the complaint case No.CC/182/2024 be and the same is dismissed being not admitted for devoid of merit and with no cost. 

Dictated & corrected by me.

 

President

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Debasish Bandyopadhyay]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Dhiraj Kumar Dey]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Minakshi Chakraborty]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.