DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF MAY, 2024.
PRESENT : SRI VINAY MENON .V, PRESIDENT.
: SMT. VIDYA.A., MEMBER.
: SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
Date Of Filing: 20.03.2024.
CC/99/2024
Sheebamol, - Complainant
W/ o.Antony Bose.P,
Malayappan Veedu, Pazhukanikkalam,
Vengodi PO, Elappullly,
Near Patspin Company,
District Palakkad, Kerala-678 622.
(By Adv.E.Suresh Kumar Nair)
Vs
1. Dr.Praveen.K.P, Chairman and Managing -Opposite Parties
Director, Safe and Strong Business Consultants Pvt. Ltd,
Adam Bazar Building, Thrissur-680 001.
2. Dr.Praveen K.P, S/o.K.K.Pushkaran,
Kaipully House, Veluthur Post,
Thrissur-680 021.
(For OP1 & OP2 by Adv.M.Raghu)
ORDER
BY SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
1. Pleadings of the complainant.
The complainant entered into a franchisee agreement with the opposite party on 19.02.2020 paying Rs.2,00,000/- as good will security. The agreed condition was that the opposite party will pay Rs.6,000/- per month as franchisee income and when the franchisee is closed, the good will security amount will be refunded in full. When the opposite party failed to pay the monthly franchisee income as promised, the complainant sent letters on 19.08.2020, 19.12.2020 and 19.04.2021 demanding the same and closure of the franchisee agreement. When 16 months payments (Rs.96,000/-) were pending upto May, 2021, the opposite party, instead of settling the dues, issued a certificate for Rs.48,000/- as additional security for one year for which Rs.600- per month was offered as good will stipend.
As the payments were not forthcoming as agreed the complainant issued legal notice on 18.02.2024 to the opposite party seeking payment of 6,35,000/- towards pending goodwill deposit, franchisee income and compensation. Legal notices were also issued to the District Collector, Thrissur, RBI Governor, and Registrar of companies on 21.02.2024 seeking their intervention in getting the amount back. As all the above efforts did not yield any result, this complaint is filed soliciting orders for getting back the pending franchisee income and good will security along with compensation and legal expenses.
2. Notices were issued to the opposite parties. They entered appearance and filed their version. Their primary contention is that the complaint is not maintainable under Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as the complainant will not fall under the definition of ‘Consumer’ as defined in the Act. As the complainant has entered into a franchisee agreement with the opposite party this is purely a business (commercial) transaction.
3. Hence the case was taken for hearing and orders on the question of maintainability.
4. It is settled position of law that franchisee is not a consumer, but undertake the business activities for and on behalf of the principal (franchisor) on the basis of an agreement.
5. In the present case, the relevant paragraph of the franchisee agreement read as follows;
2) രണ്ടാം പാർട്ടി നടത്തി വരുന്ന ബിസിനസ്സിന്റെ ഫ്രാൻഞ്ചൈസി എടുത്ത് പ്രവർത്തിക്കാൻ താല്പര്യമാണെന്ന് അറിയിച്ചതിനെ തുടർന്ന് രണ്ടാം പാർട്ടിക്ക് ഒന്നാം പാർട്ടിയുടെ ഫ്രാൻഞ്ചൈസി നിബന്ധനകൾക്ക് വിധേയമായി തുടരുവാൻ ഒന്നാം പാർട്ടി സമ്മതിച്ചിട്ടുള്ളതാണ്.
3) മേല്പറഞ്ഞ ബിസിനസ്സ് ഇടപാടിലേക്ക് രണ്ടാം പാർട്ടി ഒന്നാം പാർട്ടിക്ക് കമ്പനിയുടെ ഗുഡ് വിൽ സെക്യൂരിറ്റിയായി ഏറ്റ Rs.2,00,000/- (രണ്ടു ലക്ഷം) രൂപ നിശ്ചയ പ്രകാരം ഇന്നേ ദിവസം നല്കിയിട്ടുള്ളതും ആയത് ഒന്നാം പാർട്ടി കൈപറ്റിയിട്ടുള്ളതുമാണ്.
The complainant has signed the above agreement duly understanding that it is franchisee agreement. Further, the transaction between the complainant and the opposite party has been explained as a franchisee agreement throughout the complaint pleadings.
6. From the above, it is clear from the face of records that the transaction between the complainant and the opposite party is purely commercial (business) in nature. Hence, we are of the opinion that the complainant will not fit into the definition of ‘Consumer’ under CP Act, 2019. So, this Commission is not having jurisdiction to adjudicate the case. Hence, the complaint is disposed off as not maintainable.
Pronounced in open court on this the 24th day of May, 2024.
Sd/-
VINAY MENON .V,
PRESIDENT.
Sd/-
KRISHNANKUTTY N .K,
MEMBER.
