SHIV KUMAR GUPTA vs BANWALI

-THIS appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is directed against the order dated 24.1.2002 in Complaint Case No. 4/2001 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kawardha (hereinafter called the ''District Forum'' for short) dismissing the complaint.

IT was averred in the complaint that the complainant had obtained agricultural land admeasuring 6 acres for an annual premium of Rs. 6,000/- on lease (Regha). An agreement dated 24.1.2000 to that effect was also executed by the parties. IT was also averred that the use by the complainant/appellant of motor pump installed in the said land was also included in the said agreement. The grievance of the complainant/appellant was that the respondent did not permit him to use the said motor pump as a result of which the appellant was deprived of using the same, resulting in loss to him. He, therefore, claimed compensation of Rs. 50,000/-. Respondent resisted the complaint. It was averred by him in his written version that the agreement between the parties was for use of the motor pump by both the parties. It was also averred that false complaint has been lodged by the complainant.

District Forum dismissed the complaint holding that deficiency in service by the respondent could not be proved.

LEARNED Counsel for complainant/appellant assailed the finding of the District Forum and submitted that since the appellant was not permitted to use the motor pump as per agreement, the later had committed deficiency in service. None appeared for the respondent. It has to be considered whether there was any deficiency in service by the respondent?

UNDISPUTEDLY the complainant/appellant is asserting his right on the strength of the agreement captioned as ''Reghahanama'', copy of which is placed on record. According to the said agreement, the land was given to the complainant/appellant for a period of 10 years. Use of the pump and the well was included in the said agreement. The main grievance of the complainant is that the pump and well is not being permitted to be used as per the said agreement. It also appears that proceedings under Section 145, Cr.P.C. in respect of the above dispute is also initiated against the parties by the Police, Kawardha. In view of the above, it is clear that the complainant/appellant is complaining of breach of agreement between the parties. It would also appear from above that the relationship of ''consumer'' and ''service provider'' has not been established between the parties. This being the position, there was no question of any deficiency in service by the respondent. In view of the above, the complainant could not have approached the Consumer Forum for Redressal of his grievance. Dismissal of the complaint by the District Forum, therefore, was justified. Therefore, there being no substance in this appeal, it is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.