IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 24th day of February, 2022
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No.313/2021 (filed on 31-12-2021)
Petitioner : Sebastian P.A.,
Poothura House,
Mamood P.O.,
Changanacherry.
(Adv.Saji Jacob Pampady)
Vs.
Opposite party : Joseph Mathew,
Kulathunkal House,
Pampady P.O.,
Kottayam.
O R D E R
Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Complainant absent. No representation. On going through the complaint it can be seen that the complainant is filed praying for an orders directing the opposite party to return the balance security amount which is paid to the opposite party for availing the room for the opposite party as rent. On a mere reading of the allegation in the complaint it can be seen that the relationship between to complainant is of a tenant and landlord and the dispute is in the nature of civil dispute and was not in consumer dispute as defined in the Consumer Protection Act. Hence we are of the opinion that the complaint is not admissible as the complainant fail to prove that he is a consumer of the opposite party and there exist a consumer dispute between the complainant and opposite party. Therefore we are not inclined to admit the case. The complaint is not admissible and the office is directed to reject the complaint as not admissible before this Commission.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 24th day of February, 2022
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Smt. Bindhu R. Member Sd/-
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
By Order
Assistant Registrar
