STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CIRCUIT BENCH NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/CB2/27/A/18/158 SHRI. ASHOK SHYAMRAO BHURALE PRESENT ADDRESS - R/O. BRAMHAPURI TAH. BRAMHAPURI DIST. CHANDRAPUR-441

206,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus SHRI. SAI BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PRESENT ADDRESS - THROUGH PARTNER SHRI. DIVAKAR PRABHAKAR NIKURE., R/O.

MANGARUL TA- NAGBHIDNAGPUR,MAHARASHTRA.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. KALYANI KAPSE , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MS. SHAILA D. WANDHARE , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

ADV.PARDHI FOR THE RESPONDENT:

.

DATED: 11/09/2025

ORDER

1. Being aggrieved by the Order dated 25/01/2018 passed by District Consumer Redressal Forum, Chandrapur in complaint No. 134/2015, Shri Ashok Shyamrao Bhurale -V/s- Shri Sai Builders & Developers, through partner Shri Divakar Prabhakar Nikure thereby dismissed the Complaint ex-partefiled by the Complainant.

2. Shot facts leading to the filing of appeal is as follows-

(Parties are herein after referred as per their original nomenclature for better appreciation) The case of the Complainant is that the respondent is doing a business under the name & style Shri Sai Builders & Developers and deals with the business of selling the plots i.e. to purchase agriculture land and converted the same into non agriculture for residential purpose & demarcated the plots.

3. The complainant had filed complaint before District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum Chandrapur vide Complaint N u/s 12 of о. 134/2015 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for the sake of brevity ‘The Act’) thereby alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposing Party herein for executing the sale deed of plot or refund the earnest money with interest and other losses.

4. After filing the complaint learned Forum issued Notice to theOpposite Party but said notice was return back with indorsement that "not claim" therefore learned Forum passed ex-parte order against O.P. and kept the matter for final hearing and the counsel for Complainant make oral argument as well as filed written notes of argument on record.

5. The learned Forum while passing impugned order held that purchasing of plots more than one it comes under the commercial purpose and thereby dismissed the complaint of appellant/original complainant.

6. That Learned Forum below has held that the Complainant being purchasing 3 plots it comes under commercial purpose and Section 2(1)(d) of Consumer Protection Act is not attract at all in spite of that Forum passed impugned order.

7. he booked 3 plots for constructed house for him and his family and not commercial purpose but learned Forumheld that the appellant is not consumer hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of O.P. and passed impugned order and dismissed the complaint therefore the appellant/original complainant has filed present appeal against said impugned order on the following ground-

8. The Complainant has specifically stated in his complaint that said plots were booked to construct his own house as he has no house at Bramhapuri and said contention not denied by respondent being ex- parte.Inspite of that learned Forum wrongly held that purchasing of plots more than one is comes under the commercial purpose and passed the impugned order.

9. Another ground of appeal is that in The Consumer Protection Act nowhere the provision that mere purchasing more plots than one it means that it is commercial purpose though learned Forum dismissed the complaint contrary to the provision of Consumer Protection Act.

10. We have heard Mr. Pardhi, learned advocate for the Appellant/

Complainant and perused the record appeal was already proceeded ex-

parte against the respondent/O.P. by order dated 30/09/2019.

11. We have carefully gone through the documents and papers which are placed on the record. On the basis of the facts stated above following points arises for our determination with our findings recorded against the same as under.