The court ruled that allegations regarding builder buyer agreements being null and void do not constitute a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act as per Section 2(1)(c)(vii).

JUDGMENT :

PANKAJ BHATIA, J.

1. Heard Sri Brijesh Kumar Saxena and Sri Utkarsh Srivastava, learned Counsel for petitioner and Sri Sudeep Seth, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Suyash Gupta, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1.

2. The present application has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 03.08.2023, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for dismissal of the suit filed by the respondent Company under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC has been rejected by the learned Commercial Court-II, Lucknow.

3. The facts in brief are that the respondent Company filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the petitioner and one Pankaj Thakur before the Commercial Court, Lucknow. In the said suit, which is on record, the following prayers were made:

“(i) decree of declaration to the effect that all 15 (fifteen) builder buyer agreements executed with regard to unit numbers/flat numbers mentioned in paragraph 6 (six) of the plaint are illegal, null and void-ab-initio without having any legal sanctity, without consideration and had been procured by force, coercion and is a result of cheating and fraud played by defendants in collusion with each other against the plaintiff company. The above illegal Builder Buyer Agreements do not create any legal right against the plaintiff company in any manner.

(ii) decree of permanent injunction whereby defendants be restrained permanently from creating any third party interest by way of sale, mortgage, lease or from creating any lien on the above flats/property detailed and described in paragraph no. 6 (six) of the plaint on the basis of above illegal, null and void builder buyer agreements may kindly be passed in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants.

(iii) decree of permanent injunction whereby defendants be restrained permanently from interfering in the peaceful possession of above flats/units/property detailed and described in paragraph no. 6 (six) of the plaint.

(iv) decree of declaration to the effect that the proceedings initiated by defendant before UP, RERA on the basis of illegal, null and void-ab-initio builder buyer agreements cannot be proceeded further and the above proceedings are farce as the same are emanating from the illegal documents procured by defendants by illegal means.

(v) suit be decreed in favour of plaintiff and against the defendants with costs.

(vi) any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the plaintiff.”

4. In the suit, it was stated that the plaintiff-Company is involved in a construction of a Group Housing and the petitioner, who was the defendant no. 1 of the said suit, was said to be a sole authorized bank signatory working on behalf of the plaintiff-Company and the performa respondent was stated to be a Junior Accountant. Several allegations were levelled against the petitioner. In Para 6 of the plaint, it was stated that the plaintiff-Company was engaged in construction of residential accommodation and the petitioner had mala fidely allotted 15 residential flats and had retained the money collected towards the said flats. The builder buyer agreement in respect of the co