AGRANI JILA PRABHANDHAK vs NAJHAT BEGAM

THIS is an appeal against the order dated 3rd September, 1997 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sidhi in their Case No. 56/94, wherein the Forum has directed the opposite party i.e. the appellants to pay a sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 12% with effect from 23.10.1995 and Advocate''s fee of Rs. 500/-.

HEARD the arguments of both the parties and perused the records of the case. The facts of the case in short are that the complainant is proprietor of a General Store. She had received orders dated 10.10.1995 and 12.10.1995 from appellant - Union Bank of India, Hatwa Branch, District Sidhi for supply of goods as directed in the supply order of the Bank to 11 beneficiaries and Bank had directed that payment will be made only after inspection of the articles and on satisfaction regarding quality, quantity etc. That after supply of the articles, the Bank did not make any payment to the supplier stating that the supply was not made to the beneficiaries and bogus receipts were obtained from them.

The District Forum held that Bank did not make any complaint to the Police regarding fraud played by the complainant and kept quiet for such a long time and, therefore, ordered to make payment as stated in para 1 above.

THE District Forum has not discussed these important issues, (i) whether the complainant was a consumer, (ii) was he entitled to file a complaint before the Forum, (iii) what ingredients constituted the complaint, (iv) Had the District Forum jurisdiction to try this dispute? In the Consumer Protection Act, the word "consumer" has been defined separately, for two purposes of, (i) "goods" and (ii) "services". (a)For the purposes of "goods" consumer means a person who buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised or under any system of deferred payment and it includes any user of such goods other than the person who actually buys goods and such use is made with the approval of the purchaser, but excludes a person buying such goods for commercial purposes. (b)For the purposes of "services": A consumer means a person who hires or avails of any service or services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised or under any system of deferred payment, and it includes any beneficiary of such service other than the one who actually hires or avails of the services for consideration and such services are availed with the approval of such person.

UNDER the Act a "complaint" means any allegation in writing made by a complainant in regard to one or more of the following : (i)That he has suffered loss or damage as a result of any unfair or a restrictive trade practice adopted by any trader; (ii)That the goods bought by him or agreed to be bought by him suffer from one or more defects; (iii) That services hired or availed of or agreed to be hired or availed of suffer from deficiencies in any respect; (iv) That trader has charged for the goods mentioned in the complaint a price in excess of the price fixed by or under any law for the time being in force or displayed on goods or displayed on any packet containing such goods; (v) That goods which will be hazardous to life and safety when used, or offered for sale to the date in contravention of the provisions of any law for the time being in force requiring traders to display information in regard to its contents, manner and affect of use of such goods.

In the instant case, the complainant is neither a buyer of goods nor user of such goods nor does the complainant make a mention of defects in goods or dispute about price of goods or being hazardous or use of any unfair or restrictive trade practice adopted by any trader. Similarly, the complainant neither hired the services of the opposite party nor availed of nor is in any way a beneficiary of any service availed of by any other person with the approval of such person. The complainant also did not pay any consideration to the opposite party nor had in any way defined in the complaint as to what kind of service was hired or availed of or in what respect the service provided to him, suffers from any deficiency.

THE Counsel for respondent argued before us that the appellant never raised this contention orally or in writing at any stage till arguments and, therefore, this contention should not be accepted. During the course of arguments on a perusal of records, we ourselves felt that the District Forum has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law and has acted in exercise of its jurisdiction with material irregularity. As per provisions of Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, the Commission is expected to pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by any District Forum within the State if jurisdiction exercised is not vested in it by law or jurisdiction has been exercised with material irregularity and, this could have been done by this Commission even by taking up the case in suo motu revision and should have been done if it came to notice. THErefore, even if the appellant did not raise this issue at any stage a material irregularity has been committed because the complainant is not a "consumer" nor the allegations made by the complainant constitute a "complaint" as expected under the Act.

WE therefore allow this appeal and set aside the order of the District Forum and dismiss the complaint. No order as to costs. Appeal allowed. _______________