IMPORTANT POINT
Admission of a Complaint or issuing notice is not equal to taking cognizance of some criminal punishable offences by court or to act of summoning accused to face criminal trial.

ORDER

This revision has been filed under section section 58(1)(b) of The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 in challenge to the Order dated 24.01.2023 of the State Commission in Appeal no. 597 of 2022 arising out of the Order dated 26.08.2022 of the District Commission in Complaint no. 08 of 2020.

2. Relevant facts of the case have been succinctly captured by the State Commission in para 3 of its impugned Order, which are being reproduced below for reference:

The brief facts evolve from the complaint are that the Ops No. 1 & 2 are builders and OP No. 3 was their agent. Complainant wanted to purchase a 2BHK flat, so he paid an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- on 08.04.2013 as first instalment and this is how in all a total amount of 10,41,312/- was paid to the Ops on different dates. Ops assured him that the flat in question complete in all respects will be hand over to him within a period of 3 ½ years when he paid first instalment. It was alleged that he visited the site of OPs in the months of November 2016 but found that construction work had not even been started at the site and position was again the same in the month of April,2018. Thereafter, he requested Ops to refund his deposited amount, but all in vain. Thus, there was deficiency in service on the part of Ops, he filed this complaint.

3. Aggrieved by the same, an Appeal was filed before the State Commission which also met the same fate and was dismissed vide its impugned Order dated 24.01.2023 which reads as follows:

From the record it emerges that respondent No. 1-complanant booked a residential unit of 2 BHK on 08.04.20213, in the project of appellant’s by paying an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- and in all paid an amount of Rs. 10,41,312/- to the appellants. It is also admitted case of the appellants that the construction work of the project has not been completed so far despite there being an agreement executed between the parties and in the alternative the appellants have failed to refund the deposited amount to complainant. The OPs-present appellants were responsible for negligence and deficiency in service rendered by them to the complainant-respondent No. 1 and as such, while allowing the complaint vide order dated 26.08.2022, no illegality was committed by the learned District Commission, Panipat. Resultantly, present appeal is being devoid of merits and stands dismissed in limini.

The present Revision Petition has been now in challenge to the impugned Order dated 24.01.2023.

4. The submission as has been pressed forth by the learned counsel is within a brief canvas. The only point that has been pressed by the learned counsel relates to the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Commission where the complaint was filed. According to the counsel, the complaint was filed in the District Commission on 09.01.2020 and at that time the limit of pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Commission was Rs.20 lakhs while the value of the compensation claimed in the complaint exceeded this limit as it was to the tune of about Rs. 29 lakhs. Submission is that as such when the written version was filed by the Petitioner / Opposite Party in the District Commission, it raised the objection in this regard. According to the learned counsel, the complaint ought to have been filed in the State Commission. It has been contended that this objection with regard to the pecuniary jurisdiction has not been considered by the District Commission while passing its order. Later on, when the Appeal was filed before the State Commission on 21.10.2022 the similar objection was raised in the Appeal but there too the same did not favourably weigh and was ignored.

5. According to the learned counsel now the matter should be remanded back to the State Commission to be decided afresh as the said irregularity as involved cannot be covered up. This is the sole point raised on behalf of the Petitioner.

6. Perused the record including inter alia the Order passed by the District Commission as well as the impugned Order p