ORDER :

1. This civil revision petition arises against the order in I.A. No. 16 of 2021 in C.O.S. No. 2 of 2020 on the file of Special Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Visakhapatnam dated 26.03.2021 dismissing the application for return of the plaint.

2. The petitioner herein is the 1st defendant in the suit and the 1st petitioner in the interlocutory application before the court below. The 1st respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit and the respondent in the IA before the court below. The 2nd and 3rd respondents herein are not the contesting respondents and they sail with the petitioner herein before the court below.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 1st respondent.

4. The facts of the case are that the 1st respondent herein initiated an action in COS No. 2 of 2020 on the file of Special Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Visakhapatnam, against the petitioner and other respondents herein for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,79,49,771/- with interest at 18% per annum on principal amount of Rs. 1,26,57,500/- from the date of suit till its realisation on the ground that an excess amount was paid to the petitioner herein with respect to the construction of the villa as described the particulars of villa in the plaint schedule.

5. Initially, the 1st respondent herein filed the suit seeking the above said relief before the learned Principal District Court at Visakhapatnam on 31.12.2019 and the same was returned on scrutiny for presentation before the proper court having jurisdiction to entertain the said matter on the ground that the nature of transaction is covered under Section 2(vi) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (for brevity “the act”). On return of the same the said suit was represented before the Special Court for Commercial Disputes on 02.01.2020 and the Special Court also took objection with respect to the maintainability of the said suit. Subsequently, on 06.01.2020, the 1st respondent herein represented the said suit again before the learned Principal District Court at Visakhapatnam and on hearing the learned counsel for the respondent herein, the learned District Judge returned the plaint for presentation of the same before the proper court vide order, dated 07.01.2020. In pursuance of the same, the above said suit was represented before the court below/the Special Court for Commercial Disputes and the same was numbered as COS No. 2 of 2020 after complying with the certain office objections. The 1st respondent herein also filed an I.A. No. 2 of 2020 in COS No. 2 of 2020 before the court below seeking interim order of attachment before judgment of the suit schedule property as the petitioner herein failed to furnish the security and the same is pending for enquiry. The 1st respondent herein also filed another I.A. No. 27 of 2020 in the same suit under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC seeking appointment of Commissioner to note down the physical features of the suit schedule property by obtaining necessary photographs and the same is also pending for hearing. However, the petitioner herein as 1st defendant is contesting the said suit by filing the written statement before the court below. At that stage, the petitioner herein also filed the above said I.A. No. 16 of 2021 in COS No. 2 of 2020 before the court below/special court for commercial disputes under Order VII Rule 10 CPC read with Section 151 CPC to return the plaint on the ground of jurisdiction contending that the special court has no jurisdiction to entertain the said suit as the dispute between the parties cannot be termed as a “commercial dispute” within the definition of Section 2(1)(c) of the Act. The petitioner herein contends that the dispute is relating to the construction of a residential building and the transaction between the parties is not a “commercial transaction” to attrac