Orissa

Rayagada

CC/107/2016

Janabandhu Panigrahi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Arindam Paul Chier Functionary - Opp.Party(s)

Self

13 Jan 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 107 / 2015.                                       Date.     16. 11 . 2017.

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                   President

Sri GadadharaSahu, .                               Member.

Smt.  Padmalaya  Mishra,                          Member

Sri Biswajit Nayak,  S/O: Late Ashok Kumar Nayak, Smt. Pravati Pradhan, W/O: Late Ashok Kumar Nayak,   Po/Dist.Rayagada,State:  Odisha.                              …….Complainant

Vrs.

1.The Chief Manager, State bank of India, Rayagada.

2. The Zonal Manager, State bank of India,   Po/Dist.Rayagada,State:  Odisha.                                                                                                                                                                                    .…..Opp.Parties

For the complainant: - Self.

For the O.Ps  :- Sri  N.K.Das, Advocate, Rayagada.

                                        J u d g e m e n t.

        The  present disputes arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps for not  to initiate arbitrary action  against  the complainants for recovery of outstanding  educational  loan .. 

          On being noticed the   O.Ps appeared through their learned counsel  and filed   written version. The  O.P in their written version  contended that the petition is not all  correct and for those that are not specifically admitted here under, the complainants are called upon to strict proof of the same. The complaint petition do not hold good and the complaint petition is not maintainable. The O.P. filed a civil suit   on Dt.15.10.2015 against  both the complainants  for recovery of the total dues of Rs.5,45,028/- as on 14.101.2015..  Therefore the O.Ps prayed the forum to dismiss the complaint petition  against the O.Ps for the best interest of justice. 

 

The O.Ps  appeared and filed their written version.  Arguments from  the O.Ps   and complainant  heard.   Perused the record, documents, filed by both  the parties. 

                Both the parties  have  vehemently advanced arguments touching the points both on the facts  as well as on  law.

          FINDINGS.

          On perusal of the  written version it is revealed  in para-7   the O.Ps have clearly mentioned   that  a civil suit filed  against   both the complainants for recovery of the total dues of Rs.5,45,028/- as on 14.10.2015. During the  course of hearing  the learned counsel for the O.Ps  filed   civil suit No.130 of 2015 judgement  pronounced  by   Sr. Civil Judge, Rayagada on Dt. 30.8.2017 along  with   mentioned the citation of the  Hon’ble  National Commission.

 

          It is held and reported  in CPR 2015(1) page No. 228  where in the hon’ble  National Commission observed  “A matter  which is pending before Civil Court, should not be raised before Consumer Forum”.  When  the  Civil Court pronounced  order on Dt. 30.8.2017  on the same cause of action, this forum can not and will not entertain any claim  in respect of the identical subject matter in the present case.

           It is well settled  that the matter can not be decided  by consumer forum  after the civil court as pronounced on it in same of cause action L.T. Coal A.J. Anand Vrs.  The Manager, Indian Bank, Chandigarh and others 1991 CPJ  Page No. 157 Delhi  State C.D.R.Commission.

 

          The Hon’ble State C.D.R.Commission,Odisha, Cuttack  in Mrs. Jayasri Mishra VRs. SBI in which it is held that the same having been finally heard and disposal by the Civil  Court, It is not permissible to enter  in to the same issue by the Consumer  Forum. Held  1995-CLT –OSC-14 which is decided 5.9.1995.

 

          Section 2(1)©- Complaint- no complaint where the matter has been decided  by the competent court, can not reagitated.. Held in M/S. Kishsangarh Marbles Pvt. Ltd. Vrs. Gujarat State Financial Corp. in 1991  CPJ 103 (NCDRC),New Delhi.

          In the light of the aforesaid  judgements, it becomes clear that complaint petition is not maintainable before the  forum.

 

          We  are   not going to the merits of the matter and express   no opinion in respect  of the same for deciding the points raised by the complainant.   In the  result the complaint petition is dismissed but without cost.

  Dictated  and corrected by me

Pronounced on this     16th           day     of      November,       2017.

 

Member                      Member.                                                    President.