Hon’ble Mr. Ajeya Matilal, Presiding Member

          Both parties are present through their Ld. Advocates.

          Heard argument in full.

          Perused the complaint along with the W.V and evidence adduced by both sides.

          The present complaint case is based on an agreement for sale executed between the parties on 15.05.2013.

          Our attention was drawn to order no. 18 dt. 11.09.2017 passed by the Ld. Civil Judge Junior Division 4^th court Sealdah in T.S 105 of 2015. In that case the plaintiff did not take any step subsequently so the case was dismissed against him. But the defendant filed a counter claim. It appears from the aforesaid order “that the instant counter-claim be and the same is decreed ex parte without cost. The defendant does hereby get a decree of declaration that the agreement for sale dated 15.05.2013  being no. 04722 for the year 2013 has lost its force by complete disregard and violation of Clause 2, 3 4 and 5 of the agreement and the said agreement for sale is not capable of being enforced in the eye of law and not binding upon the Defendant and a decree of declaration that the Plaintiffs by banking upon the agreement for sale dated 15.05.13 cannot have any right to enforce the same due to utter violation and wilful disregard of the terms and conditions of the  agreement for sale. The defendant does also get a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Plaintiffs from claiming any right or assuming the right of baina-holder on the basis of the agreement for sale. The Plaintiffs are hereby directed to take back the amount of earnest money after deducting the compensation amount in terms of Clause 4 of the agreement from the Defendant.”

          The Ld. Civil Judge observed that the said agreement for sale was not capable of being enforced in the eye of law and not binding upon the defendant and there was a decree of declaration to the effect that the plaintiffs by banking upon the agreement for sale dt. 15.05.2013 cannot have any right to enforce the same due to utter violation and wilful disregard of the terms and conditions of the agreement for sale. 

          There is nothing on record to the effect that the aforesaid judgment / order has been set aside by any superior court. The Ld. Advocate for the complainant submitted that in the aforesaid order the plaintiffs were directed to take back the amount of earnest money after deducting the compensation amount in terms of clause 4 of the agreement from the defendant.

          But this Consumer Commission is not proper forum for realisation of earnest money as mentioned in the judgment. The consumer should have approached the Civil Court concerned which the passed the final order.

          In view of above observation the complaint case no. 74/2017 is dismissed on contest. There shall be no order as to the costs.