ORDER BELOW SECTION 36(2) AT ADMMISSION STAGE

           Per M.P.Kasar, Member

1. Heard Complainant in person dated 20/01/2023. Perused Complaint filed by the complainant which is in Complainants own hand writing and document annexed along with complaint at the stage of admission of complaint below section 36(2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019.  Complaint case has been instituted in commission vide dated 02/01/2023.

We framed issue as follows to decide issue of admissibility of the complaint case against opposite parties below section 36(2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

i) Whether complainant proves that, present complaint can be admitted against opposite parties below section 36(2) of Consumer Protection Act.?- No

           ii) What an order? -Complaint rejected against opposite parties as per order.

          FINDINGS:

2. As to issue No.1&2:-  The allegations made by the complainant in present complaint against opposite parties are not clearly understandable   as hand writing is not easily readable/legible nevertheless peruse complaint. We have requested/directed to the complainant to use to write complaint case in readable hand writing.   It is noted that, as far as territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction and limitation found that, complaint case is entertainable.  But considering the nature of grievances mentioned in the complaint case we found that, grievances raised by the complainant in hand written form cannot be redressed because complainant failed to substantiate that he is consumer of opposite parties and he have  paid consideration to the opposite parties towards services which availed. Complainant also failed to substantiate that he is preferential consumer of opposite parties and entitled for relief sought by him from the opposite parties by way of filing present complaint case.  In the case of Dr.V.N.Shrikhande Vs.Mrs.Anita Sena Fernandes Hon’ble Apex Court has held  in the para 14  ‘ ...., if the concerned forum is satisfied that the complaint does not disclose any grievances which can be redressed under the Act then is can reject the complaint at the threshold after recording reasons for doing so....’. ‘Hon’ble Apex Court  pleased to held  further in para 15 of said judgement that, ‘ We may hasten to add that the power conferred upon the consumer Forums under Sections 12(3), 18 or 22 to reject the complaint at the stage of admission should not be exercised lightly because the Act has been enacted to provide for better protection of the interest of consumers and the speedy and inexpensive redressal mechanism enshrined therein is in addition to other remedies which may be available to the consumer under the ordinary law of land.  Therefore, admission of the complaint filed under the Act should be the rule and dismissal thereof should be an exception.  Of course, if the complaint is barred by time, the consumer forum is bound to dismiss the same unless the consumer makes out a case for condonation of delay under section 24A (2).’
3. We have noticed in instant case that, complainant have remedy to approached before appropriate authorities against the orders of officers appointed under RTI Act 2005 etc. to get information or relief which complainant sought from opposite parties and complainant can be obtained ultimate orders from the higher authorities if complainant is not satisfied with the decision of lower authorities. Instantly Complainant failed to show that, there is deficiency in services on part of opposite parties in view of services.   Perusals of the views taken by Hon’ble Apex Court in regard of admission of complaint as abovementioned we are of the opinion that present complaint cannot be admitted against opposite parties below section 36(2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019 at the admission stage.   Considering above findings derived from the issue No.1 we pass order in view of issue No.2 as follows:

                                                               ORDER

         CC No.23/9  is hereby rejected against opposite parties below section 36(2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019.