Thursday, October 10, 2024

An Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

 

 

Before the Hon’ble West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata

KretaSurakshaBhawan

11A, MirzaGhalib Street, Kolkata – 700087

 

                                First Appealno.               of 2023

 

                                                         

In the matter of :

 

An Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, from the Order dated 01-12-2023, passed in CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata Unit – III (South), West Bengal, 18, Judges Court Road, Kolkata - 700027;

 

AND

 

In the matter of :

 

Impugned Order dated 01-12-2023, passed in CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata Unit – III (South), West Bengal, 18, Judges Court Road, Kolkata - 700027;

 

AND

 

In the matter of :

 

Sri Ashok Kumar Gupta, Son of Late Girija Prasad Gupta, having office at Premises being no. 2, Dharmadas Row, Kolkata – 700026, and also residing at Premises being no. 15, Mullick Para Lane, Post Office – Bangur, Police Station – Dum Dum, Kolkata – 700055, District – North 24 Parganas.

                   ______Appellant

 

-      Versus –

 

 

Sri GourMitra, Son of Late Sital Prasad Mitra, residing at Premises being no. 140A, Peary Mohan Roy Road, Post Office – Alipore, Police Station – Chetla, Kolkata – 700027, District – South 24 Parganas.

 

                                                                             __________Respondent

To,

The Hon’ble President and his companion Hon’ble Members of the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission;

 

The humble petition on behalf of the above named appellant Sri Ashok Kumar Gupta, most respectfully;

Sheweth as under;

 

1.   That the Appellant is a peace loving and law abiding Citizen, carrying his business following the Law. The appellant is residing and having his office at the address given in the cause title of this appeal.

 

2.   That the present First Appeal is preferring in challenging the proprietary & entirety of the impugned Order dated 01/12/2023, passed in Consumer Complaint being CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South).

 

3.   That the Appellant was in receipt of the notice and therefore appeared in the Consumer Complaint instituted by the Complainant i.e. the respondent herein. The appellant participated in the said Consumer Complaint, and completed his all pleadings, wherein the appellant categorically stated that the subjected flat has been sold out and the appellant was agreed to refund the money given by the respondent herein, with prevailing banking rate of interest, thereon. The appellant further stated that the said Consumer Complaint was premature and not maintainable as the events and transaction has been assailed between the parties towards investment of money by the respondent herein, and the agreement is merely a security document for the said money.

 

4.   That in the facts and in the laws, it is totally evident from the said Consumer Complaint itself that the Consumer Complainant made his endeavor to put the Learned District Commission into motion to get his wrongful gains by procuring orders in terms of his prayer before the Learned District Commission.

 

5.   That in the facts and in the laws, it is totally evident from the said consumer application itself that the consumer complainant is trying to miss utilizing the jurisdiction of the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South).

 

6.   That on surfacing the above stated facts and the Law, in the said Consumer Case no. CC/361/2021, the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), was pleased to pass the Order dated 01-12-2023, thereby allowing the said Consumer Case on contest with cost. The relevant portion of the said order dated 01/12/2023, is reproduce in the followings;

That the instant complaint is allowed on contest with cost.OP is directed to hand over the possession of the `B’ schedule flat to the complainant and also execute and register a deed of conveyance in respect of the flat in favour of the complainant on receiving the balance consideration from him in accordance with the agreement for sale dt. 6/11/2020 made between the parties.OP is also directed to pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.8,000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant. OP is directed to comply with this order within 60 days from the date of this order, failing which, the complainant shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law”.

7.       That being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), the Appellant preferred this appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, on the following amongst others;

 

GROUND

 

I.             For that the impugned Order dated 01-12-2023, passed in CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata Unit – III (South), West Bengal, 18, Judges Court Road, Kolkata - 700027, is erroneous being result of preoccupied mind of the Learned Consumer Commission favouring the Respondent herein;

 

II.           For that the subjected Schedule property being the flat has been sold by the appellant based on conversation of the respondent herein, which has not been considered by the Learned District Commission;

 

III.          For that while the entire disputes and cause of action thereby by and between the parties are not Consumer Disputes as meant for in the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019;

 

IV.         For that while the subjected agreement is in terms of the security of money invested by the respondent, herein;

 

V.           For that the said Consumer Complaint, if any, is premature proceeding, and thus not maintainable at any terms either in the fact or in the terms of the Law;

 

VI.         For that while the subjected flat has already been sold out and not in occupation of the appellant, the impugned Order dated 01-12-2023, passed in CC/361/2021, by the Learned District Commission is not executable;

 

VII.        For that the appellant participated in the said Consumer Complaint, and completed his all pleadings, wherein the appellant categorically stated that the subjected flat has been sold out and the appellant was agreed to refund the money given by the respondent herein, with prevailing banking rate of interest, thereon. The appellant further stated that the said Consumer Complaint was premature and not maintainable as the events and transaction has been assailed between the parties towards investment of money by the respondent herein, and the agreement is merely a security document for the said money;

 

VIII.      For that the Learned District Consumer Commission misunderstood the facts and the concern of the Law involved in hearing the said Consumer Case and thus the same has been allowed with cost, payable to the Consumer Complaint;

 

 

IX.         For that the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), suffered with gross errors and highly prejudice;

 

X.           For that the Order under challenge is of prejudice to the appellant herein, and as such not desirable thereof, in terms of the Law;

 

XI.         For that the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), should be dismissed in limnie in the interest of administration of Justice;

 

XII.       For that the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), is not establishing any correct proposition of Law, and thus the same would not be a precedent which cause prejudice highly, so far;

 

XIII.      For that the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), is erroneous based on summarize of misconception and misunderstanding of the facts as well as the Law;

 

XIV.     For that the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), is highly prejudice and denied justice to the Revisionist;

 

XV.       For that the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), is Bad in Law;

 

8.       That the other ground / grounds will be agitate/place at the time of hearing of this appeal.

 

9.       That unless this Hon’ble State Commission interferes in the present appeal, grave injustice would be caused to the appellant.

 

10.    That the appellant enclosing herewith the Original Certified Copy of the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South).

 

11.    That the appellant enclosing herewith the copy of the followings :

i)         Consumer Complaint with all annexures in CC/361/2021;

ii)       Written Version of the appellant;

iii)      Evidence on affidavit by the Respondent;

iv)      Questionnaire by the Appellant, & Reply by the Respondent;

v)        Evidence on Affidavit by the Appellant;

vi)      Questionnaire by the Respondent & Reply by the Appellant;

vii)     Brief Notes of Argument by the Respondent & the Appellant;

 

12.    That this appeal is made bona-fide and for the interest of administration of justice.

 

Under the circumstances, the Petitioner, of this instant revision application / petition, prays before your Lordship, would be graciously pleased to admit this instant appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act’ 2019, issue notice upon the Respondent, call for the L.C.R. from the Ld. Lower Consumer Commission, and after conducting the appropriate hearing of this instant appeal, set aside the impugned Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), and to dismiss the Consumer Complaint being CC/361/2021, in the interest of administration of Justice,

 

And / or to STAY the operation of the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes RedressalCommission Kolkata Unit – III (South), till disposal of the present appeal, before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, in the interest of administration of justice,

 

And /or to pass such other or further necessary order or orders as your Lordship may deem, fit, and proper, for the end of justice.

 

And for this act of kindness, your Petitioner, as in duty bound shall ever pray.

 

 

 

 

Certificate;

 

I, certify that I have pursued the records of this case, and I certify that there are merits and So, I undertake to argue this case for the Appellant at the time of hearing;

 

 

 

Advocate for the Appellant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enclosing herewith the following documents;

 

1.   Certified Copy of the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South);

 

2.   Consumer Complaint with all annexures in CC/361/2021;

 

3.   Written Version of the appellant;

 

4.   Evidence on affidavit by the Respondent;

 

5.   Questionnaire by the Appellant, & Reply by the Respondent;

 

6.   Evidence on Affidavit by the Appellant;

 

7.   Questionnaire by the Respondent & Reply by the Appellant;

 

8.   Brief Notes of Argument by the Respondent & the Appellant;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AFFIDAVIT

 

Affidavit of Sri Ashok Kumar Gupta, Son of Late Girija Prasad Gupta, aged about 48 years, by faith Hindu, by Occupation Business, residing at premises being no. 15, Mullick Para Lane, Post Office Bangur, Police Station DumDum, Kolkata – 700055.

 

 

I, the above deponents do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-

 

1.   That I beg to say that I am the Appellant, and thoroughly conversant with the facts and circumstances of the present consumer case and I am competent to swear this affidavit.

 

2.   That I beg to say that the grounds stated therein in the appeal are well founded to argued in the present appeal, in the interest of administration of justice.

 

3.   That the facts contained in my memo of appeal, the contents of which have not been repeated herein for the sake of brevity may be read as an integral part of this affidavit and are true and correct to my knowledge.

 

The above statements are true to my knowledge and belief.

 

 

 

 

DEPONENT

 

Identified by me,

 

 

Advocate

Prepared in my Chamber,

 

 

 

Advocate

 

Dated : ________________2023;

Place :Alipore, Kolkata.

 

Brief Notes of Argument by the Respondent in Consumer Case

 

BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLKATA UNIT-III

Tramline Building ( 1st Floor )

18, Judges Court Road, Alipore, Kolkata - 700027

 

 

CC/361/2021

In the matter of :

Sri GourMitra, Son of Late SitalPrassadMitra, residing at premises being no. 104A, Peary Mohan Roy Road, Post Office Alipore, Police Station – Chetla, Kolkata – 700027.                             ______Petitioner

-      Versus –

-       

Sri Ashok Kumar Gupta, Son of Late Girija Prasad Gupta, residing at premises being no. 15, Mullick Para Lane, Post Office Bangur, Police Station DumDum, Kolkata – 700055.

                             ____Respondent

 

Brief Notes of Argument

On behalf of

The Respondent;

Argument;

 

Admittedly, the Complainant invested his money by way of Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, which is symbolic in nature as a Security documents of his investment. Consequently, the complainant tried to establish a Consumer disputes, well before the given date in the said agreement for sale. Thus the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief at First Investor is not a Consumer; and Secondly the consumer application is premature;

 

SurendraKapur – versus – M/s. Puja Construction Limited and 3 Others; in Consumer Case No. 307 of 2013; Decided on 03/11/2022; by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi;

 

 

LIST OF DATES

 

Sl. No.

Date

Particulars’

01

06/11/2020

Agreement for Sale / Payment of Rs. 10,00,000/-

02

08/12/2020

Payment of Rs. 5,00,000/-

03

06/02/2021

Payment of Rs. 5,00,000/-

04

28/07/2021

Email by the Complainant

04

02/08/2021

Email to the Complainant

“as advised by you I have sold your Ground Floor Flat at 65/2, JainuddinMistry Lane, Kolkata – 700027. The intending purchaser will make the payment by second week of August, 2021, after which I will return the advance amount that you have paid me at the time of booking the Flat. I hope to pay you by 25th August, 2021”

05

05/08/2021

Email by the Complainant

06

06/05/2022

Agreement for Sale Valid till date

07

18/08/2021

The Present Consumer case was filled

 

Fact;

a)    That the Agreement for Sale dated 6th of November 2020, has been entered between the parties being an indenture of Security of investment made by the Petitioner to the Respondent, herein. The money being sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- ( Rupees Twenty Lakhs ) only, has been paid on different dates by the petitioner to the respondent herein and thereby entitle to get such money with appropriate banking rate of interest thereon. Thus the said Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, is a symbolic one as a Security documents of investment made by the petitioner herein.

 

b)   That the investment of the Petitioner and return thereof with appropriate banking rate of interest thereon is a commercial activities between the parties herein and the same has lost the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

 

c)    That in the event, considering the said Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, it is pertinently states that the petitioner failed to comply with the payment schedule or the manner of payment in the given time frame in the said agreement for sale.

 

d)   That the petitioner placed his financial difficulties to pay any further to the respondent herein and approached the respondent as to sale out the subjected flat to other intending purchaser and refund his money on such sale.

 

e)    That in pursuance of asking of the petitioner, respondent proceeded and sold out the subject flat of the said Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, to other intending purchaser, and arranged himself to pay back money of the petitioner with appropriate banking rate of interest but this is the petitioner who in greed to get more money presumably changed his color and with such motivation initiated the present consumer proceeding against the respondent.

 

f)     That the given disputes of the petitioner in his petition of consumer complaint are not a consumer disputes as meant for the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

 

g)    That the Respondent is all along ready and willing to refund the money paid by the petitioner with appropriate banking rate of interest.

 

h)   That the said Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, clearly contended that the respondent has agreed to hand over the proposed flat to the purchaser within 18 months from the date of the agreement, subject to the petitioner complying to the terms of payment mentioned in schedule – E and standard force majure conditions, therefore the eighteen months come on 6th day of April’ 2022, thus the present consumer proceeding is premature one initiated by the petitioner.

 

CONCLUSION;

 

The Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in terms of his prayer;

 

 

============================XXX===========================

Brief Notes of Argument by the Appellant in Consumer Appeal

 

 

Before the Hon’ble West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata

KretaSurakshaBhawan

11A, MirzaGhalib Street, Kolkata – 700087

 

First Appeal no. A/23/2024

 

                                                         

In the matter of :

Sri Ashok Kumar Gupta, Son of Late Girija Prasad Gupta, having office at Premises being no. 2, Dharmadas Row, Kolkata – 700026, and also residing at Premises being no. 15, Mullick Para Lane, Post Office – Bangur, Police Station – Dum Dum, Kolkata – 700055, District – North 24 Parganas.

                   ______Appellant

 

-      Versus –

 

 

Sri Gour Mitra, Son of Late Sital Prasad Mitra, residing at Premises being no. 140A, Peary Mohan Roy Road, Post Office – Alipore, Police Station – Chetla, Kolkata – 700027, District – South 24 Parganas.

 

                                                                             __________Respondent

 

BRIEF NOTES OF ARGUMENT

ON BEHALF OF

THE APPELLANT

 

1.   That the present First Appeal is preferring in challenging the proprietary & entirety of the impugned Order dated 01/12/2023, passed in Consumer Complaint being CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South). The relevant portion of the said order dated 01/12/2023, is reproduce in the followings;

“What we find from our discussion as made above that the OP took the plea that he already sold the scheduled flat to other intending purchaser and he claimed this through e-mail dt. 2/8/2021 which is during the stipulated period or in other words, before the stipulated period of 18 months expired.  So, OPs are found to have unilaterally deviated from the terms of the said agreement or in other words, putting an end to the said agreement by claiming that he had sold out the scheduled flat booked by the complainant before expiry of the said stipulated period though he failed to establish the same during hearing as discussed hearing above.  Therefore, if the complainant had waited for the said stipulated period of 18 months to expire and then came to this commission for relief, the plea of the OP would not have been otherwise than the one taken in this case.  The acts of the OP created so much grave a situation for the complainant, where waiting for the remaining period to expire for getting redressal from this commission, became absolutely meaningless.  It is found to be the sheer anxiety of the complainant who is found to be a consumer that drove him to approach this commission for redressal”.

That the instant complaint is allowed on contest with cost.OP is directed to hand over the possession of the `B’ schedule flat to the complainant and also execute and register a deed of conveyance in respect of the flat in favour of the complainant on receiving the balance consideration from him in accordance with the agreement for sale dt. 6/11/2020 made between the parties.OP is also directed to pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.8,000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant. OP is directed to comply with this order within 60 days from the date of this order, failing which, the complainant shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law”.

 

2.   That the subjected Schedule property being the flat has been sold by the appellant based on conversation of the respondent herein, which has not been considered by the Learned District Commission.

 

3.   For that while the subjected flat has already been sold out and not in occupation of the appellant, the impugned Order dated 01-12-2023, passed in CC/361/2021, by the Learned District Commission is not executable.

 

4.   That the appellant participated in the said Consumer Complaint, and completed his all pleadings, wherein the appellant categorically stated that the subjected flat has been sold out and the appellant was agreed to refund the money given by the respondent herein, with prevailing banking rate of interest, thereon. The appellant further stated that the said Consumer Complaint was premature and not maintainable as the events and transaction has been assailed between the parties towards investment of money by the respondent herein, and the agreement is merely a security document for the said money.

 

5.   That the Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), is not establishing any correct proposition of Law, and thus the same would not be a precedent which cause prejudice highly, so far;

 

LIST OF DATES;

 

Sl. No.

Date

Particulars’

01

06/11/2020

Agreement for Sale / Payment of Rs. 10,00,000/-

02

08/12/2020

Payment of Rs. 5,00,000/-

03

06/02/2021

Payment of Rs. 5,00,000/-

04

28/07/2021

Email by the Complainant

04

02/08/2021

Email to the Complainant

“as advised by you I have sold your Ground Floor Flat at 65/2, Jainuddin Mistry Lane, Kolkata – 700027. The intending purchaser will make the payment by second week of August, 2021, after which I will return the advance amount that you have paid me at the time of booking the Flat. I hope to pay you by 25th August, 2021”

05

05/08/2021

Email by the Complainant

06

06/05/2022

Agreement for Sale Valid till date

07

18/08/2021

The Present Consumer case was filled

 

Facts;

a)    That the Agreement for Sale dated 6th of November 2020, has been entered between the parties being an indenture of Security of investment made by the Respondent to the Appellant, herein. The money being sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- ( Rupees Twenty Lakhs ) only, has been paid on different dates by the respondent to the appellant herein and thereby entitle to get such money with appropriate banking rate of interest thereon. Thus the said Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, is a symbolic one as a Security documents of investment made by the respondent herein.

 

b)   That the investment of the Respondent and return thereof with appropriate banking rate of interest thereon is a commercial activities between the parties herein and the same has lost the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

 

c)    That in the event, considering the said Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, it is pertinently states that the Respondent failed to comply with the payment schedule or the manner of payment in the given time frame in the said agreement for sale.

 

d)   That the Respondent placed his financial difficulties to pay any further to the Appellant herein and approached the appellant as to sale out the subjected flat to other intending purchaser and refund his money on such sale.

 

e)    That in pursuance of asking of the respondent, appellant proceeded and sold out the subject flat of the said Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, to other intending purchaser, and arranged himself to pay back money of the respondent with appropriate banking rate of interest but this is the respondent who in greed to get more money presumably changed his color and with such motivation initiated the consumer proceeding against the appellant.

 

f)     That the Appellant is all along ready and willing to refund the money paid by the respondent with appropriate banking rate of interest.

 

g)    That the said Agreement for Sale dated 6th day of November’ 2020, clearly contended that the appellant has agreed to hand over the proposed flat to the purchaser within 18 months from the date of the agreement, subject to the respondent complying to the terms of payment mentioned in schedule – E and standard force majure conditions, therefore the eighteen months come on 6th day of April’ 2022, thus the consumer proceeding is premature one initiated by the respondent only on 18/08/2021.

 

Conclusion;

 

          The Order dated 1st day of December’ 2023, passed in Consumer Complaint no. CC/361/2021, by the Learned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata Unit – III (South), would be modified with a direction for refund of money with appropriate banking rate of interest in lieu of the extent of delivery of possession to the respondent herein.