DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 10^th  day of June,  2022

Present      :   Sri.Vinay Menon V.,  President

                  :   Smt.Vidya A., Member                        

                  :  Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member                                   Date of Filing: 19/05/2022

     CC/84/2022

Rasheedmon P.A.

S/o Abdul Khadir,

Director, Ali Builders,

Poolakkal House, Pathiripala (PO),

Palakkad – 678 302                                                   -          Complainant

(By Adv.T.N.Sabeesh)

                                                                                     Vs

1.Dr.Lesly George,

    The Rang, Thottathukalam,

    Valara, Nattukal (PO),

    Nallepilly, Palakkad.

2.Lijo Joy,

   H/o. Dr.Lesly George,

   The Rang, Thottathukalam,

   Valara, Nattukal (PO),

   Nallepilly, Palakkad.                                                            -           Opposite Parties

   (notice not issued)

O R D E R 

By Sri. Vinay Menon V., President

1. Per admission made by the complainant herein, this complaint is a counter blast to CC/298/2019 filed by the respondents herein against alleged deficiency in service that occurred on the part of the complainant herein during the construction of a residential building.
2. The complainant, a qualified civil engineer, entered into an agreement with the opposite parties herein for construction of a residential building for opposite parties. Instead of complying  with the terms and conditions of the work agreement, the opposite parties raised various frivolous and unfair disputes and failed in effecting  payment of Rs.7,30,000/- to the complainant.  The complainant suffered heavy losses. Conduct of the opposite parties tantamount to deficiency in service and unfair contract.  Aggrieved thereby, the complainant herein seeks for amounts payable by the opposite parties to the complainant and for other allied reliefs.
3. Upon going through the complaint pleadings,  this Commission felt that this is a material for a  money suit which ought to have been  filed before a civil court of competent jurisdiction. Therefore, without ordering issuance of notice to the opposite parties, this matter was taken up for admission hearing on maintainability.
4. Counsel for the complainant argued vehemently banking on the preposition that the conduct of the opposite parties tantamount to unfair contract and hence this Commission ought to take cognizance of the allegations.  He relied on  the various interpretations of Section 2(46) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, relating to unfair contract. 
5. Intensity of the arguments raised by the counsel for complainant not with-standing, we are not impressed  by  the merits of the arguments of the complainant revolving  around Section 2(46).  The only question that arise for consideration is whether the complainant herein is a consumer as contemplated under Section 2(7) of the Act.  Section 2(7) (ii) being  the relevant section  is quoted herein below:

“Consumer means a person who hires or avails of any service for consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary  of such service other than the  person who hires or avails  of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised or under any system of deferred, when such services  are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned  person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose”.

6. From a reading of the aforesaid provision of law in conjunction with the pleadings in the complaint, we do not find that the complainant had availed any service for any consideration whatsoever from the opposite parties. On the contrary, it was the opposite parties who had availed services from the complainant.

7. The aforesaid being the fact and the law as applicable to the pleadings herein, this complaint does not merit admission and is hereby dismissed inlimine.

            Pronounced in open court on this the 10^th day of June, 2022.

         Sd/-

                                                                                                             Vinay Menon V

                                                      President

          Sd/-

    Vidya.A

                        Member     

                               Sd/-

                                                                                               Krishnankutty N.K.

                                                                                                      Member