Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/255/2022

G. Devarajan, s/o. late J. Gopalakrishnan, sathiyanarayanan st, sembium, chennai-600 001 - Complainant(s)

Versus

CASINO THEATRE, MOUNT ROAD, ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI-02 - Opp.Party(s)

m/s. G. Devarajan

26 May 2022

ORDER

IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

 

Present: Hon’ble Thiru Justice R.SUBBIAH       ... PRESIDENT

 

                  Thiru. S.KARUPPIAH    ... JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

F.A. No.255 of 2022

 

(Against the Order dated 17.02.2022, in SR No.295/2021 on the file of the DCDRC, Chennai-North)

                                                    

Thursday, the 26^th Day of May 2022

 

G.Devarajan,

S/o. (late) J.Gopalakrishnan,

New No.12, Old No.25

Sathiyanarayanan Street

Appo Rao Garden, II Floor

Sembium, Chennai 600 011.               … Appellant/Complainant

 

vs.

 

 

Casino Theatre

The Proprietor/ The Manager

2, Blockers Road

Mount Road (Anna Salai)

Chintadripet

Chennai – 600 002.              … Respondent /Opposite Party

               

 

Appellant, appearing party-in-person.

 

This Appeal is coming before us for hearing today and, after hearing the complainant and upon perusing the material records, this Commission passes the following:-

 

O R D E R

 

 

R.Subbiah, J. – President.      (Open Court)

 

             The present First Appeal has been filed as against the order, dated 17.02.2022, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai-North, in SR No.295/2021, whereby, the complaint filed by the appellant herein was rejected under Section 36(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 at the SR Stage.

 

        2.     It is the case of the complainant that he booked tickets for watching movie screened in the opposite party theatre on 30.10.2021.  The ticket is for 07.11.2021.  The complainant came to know that the tickets sold by the opposite parties are not according to G.O.(Ms) No.762 dated 16.10.2017.  The entry fee for the opposite party theatre has been fixed at Rs.100/- maximum and Rs.50/-minimum.  But the complainant has booked the ticket in advance through internet by paying Rs.159.50.  The Government has fixed the rate only as Rs.50/-.  Therefore, as per the Government order, the opposite theatre should refund the excess amount collected from the complainant immediately.  Hence, he has filed the complaint. 

 

        3.  The said complaint has been filed on 10.11.2021.  After perusing the complaint and other documents, the District Commission issued check slip to the complainant to rectify the defects on or before 17.12.2021.  On 17.12.2021, the President was on Earned Leave and so adjourned to 20.01.2022.  On 20.01.2022, the complainant was absent for rectifying the defects and so adjourned to 17.02.2022 for clarification.  On the said date, the complaint was rejected on the ground that the complainant has not stated the designation of the opposite party correctly in the cause title and has also not stated how the opposite party had violated the Government order. Furthermore, the complainant has not rectified the defects till such time. 

 

        4.  Thus, the District Commission has come to the conclusion that the complainant is in the habit of filing similar cases without sufficient reasons with the intention to enrich himself and in the present complaint no prima facie case is made out against the opposite parties.   Therefore, the District Commission has rejected the complaint.

 

        5.  In our considered opinion, rejecting a complaint on merits before numbering the Appeal and filing of version, may not be appropriate.  In the interest of justice, opportunity could be given to the complainant, to contest the case on merits.  In the event, the District Commission comes to the conclusion at the final stage that no prima facie case is made out against the opposite party, the District Commission has always liberty to pass appropriate orders. 

 

        6.  In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the impugned order, dated 17.02.2022, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai North, in SR No.295 of 2021, with a direction to the said Commission to take the Complaint on file, if it is in otherwise order and dispose of the same on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a reasonable time-frame.

 

 

S.KARUPPIAH                                               R.SUBBIAH

(JUDL. MEMBER)                                         (PRESIDENT)

 

 

avr/TNSCDRC/Chennai/Orders/MAY/2022.