Tribunals and Commissions(1996) 03 NCDRC CK 0017

FEDERATION OF CONSUMER ORGANISATIONS OF TAMIL NADU vs RAMESH CARS FINANCE CORPORATION

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 28 March 1996 · Citation: 1996 3 CPJ 276

HON’BLE JUDGES
E.J.Bellie , V.S.Kandasamy , Angel Arulraj J.
RESULT
Complaint dismissed

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 434 words
1.

THIS complaint is by a Consumer Organisation. It is alleged that the Opposite Party is indulging in unfair trade practice. It is prayed that the Opposite Party may be directed to discontinue their unfair trade practice and distribute the prize amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- among all the consumers who had made their deposits with the Opposite Party . Other reliefs also have been prayed for.

2.

THE Opposite Party has filed a counter denying the allegations made against it, i.e. the Company and also contending that the complaint is not maintainable. As stated above, the complainant is a Consumer Organisation. In the complaint it is not stated that any consumer is aggrieved by the alleged trade practice of the Opposite Party. The question is : in such a case, whether a complaint is maintainable?

Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act provides as to who are all the persons who can file a complaint. They are listed under four clauses in it as follows : "(a) the consumer to whom such goods are sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or such service provided or agreed to be provided; (b) any recognised consumer association whether the consumer to whom the goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or service provided or agreed to be provided is a member of such association or not; (c) one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, with the permission of the District Forum, on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all consumers so interested; or (d) the Central or the State Government."

The complainant organisation itself is not a consumer vis-a-vis the Opposite Party and therefore it does not come within clause (a). It is not the case of the complainant organisation that it is filing the complaint on behalf of numerous consumers and therefore clause (c) is not attracted. Clause (d) is with regard to the Central or the State Government, therefore that clause is also not attracted. The only clause left is clause (b). A close reading of this clause would show that an Association can file a complaint on behalf of or along with a consumer as defined in the Act whether that consumer is a member of the Association or not. But as aforementioned, there is not such consumer referred to in the complaint at all. Therefore clause (b) is also not attracted. Hence it is manifest that the complaint, as it is filed, cannot be maintained.

3.

IN the result, therefore, the complaint is dismissed. No costs. Complaint dismissed.