DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

Palakkad, Kerala

Dated this the 1^st day of December, 2011

Present : Smt.Seena.H. President

: Smt.Preetha G Nair, Member

: Smt.Bhanumathi A.K, Member Date of filing: 15/05/2011

CC / 61/2011

Vijayan,

S/o Kuttappan,

Manniyamkode Veedu,

Nelliyamkunnam, - Complainant

Kattussery Amsam Desam,

Alathur P.O,

Alathur Taluk

(BY ADV. R. RATHEESH)

Vs

K. Shailaja,

W/o Arumugan,

18/692, Nellikkad House, - Opposite party

Pudussery Amsam Desam,

palakkad Taluk

(BY ADV. N.A. ANOOPKUMAR)

O R D E R

BY SMT. SEENA. H, PRESIDENT

Complaint in brief:-

Complainant entered in to an agreement dated 13/06/2009 with opposite party for the purchase of a lorry for Rs. 3,35,000/-. As per the agreement there shall not be any dues whatsoever with respect to the vehicle. Also any cases civil or criminal has to settled prior to transfer. Agreed amount was paid and complainant has taken possession of the vehicle. Later when the complainant took steps to transfer the vehicle from Malappuram to Palakkad, RTO informed that the amount of Rs. 15,000/- is due to Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Board and hence vehicle is not transferable. Hence complaint is filed for an order directing the opposite party to pay Rs. 15,000/- along with 24% interest and cost of the proceedings.

Opposite party filed version contending inter alia that complainant is not a consumer and the dispute is not a consumer dispute and hence not maintainable before the Forum. Further welfare fund is the amount paid by the owner of the vehicle from time to time. Opposite party has no responsibility for payment of the amount after sale of the vehicle. Complaint is filed for violation of contract and for specific performance. No deficiency in service is alleged in the complaint. Hence complaint is to be dismissed with cost.

The evidence led by the parties consists of their respective proof affidavit. Ext. A1 to A3 marked on the side of the complainant.

Issues for consideration:

1. Whether complaint is maintainable before the Forum?

2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

3. If so, What is the relief and cost complainant is entitled to?

Issue No.I

The main contention of the opposite party is that complaint is not maintainable before the Forum.

Heard both parties and has gone through the evidence on record.

The specific case of the complainant is that opposite party failed to comply the terms of the agreement, viz, settlement of dues to the Welfare Board. On going through the facts of the case, we are also of the view that complaint is filed for breach of contract. There is no mention of any service hired from the opposite party and no allegation for any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Hence we are of the view that complaint is not maintainable before the Forum. Hence 1^st issue is answered in favour of the opposite party.

Issues No: 2 & 3

As complaint is found not maintainable before the Forum, we are not further proceeding with the further issues.

In the result, complaint dismissed with direction to the complainant to approach appropriate court.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 1^st day of December, 2011

Smt. Seena. H

President

Smt. Preetha. G. Nair

Member

Smt. Bhanumathi. A. K

Member

A P P E N D I X

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

Ext. A1 – Copy of Vehicle Sale Agreement between the complainant and opposite party dated 13/06/2009.

Ext. A2 - Copy of Lawyer Notice with Postal Receipt issued by the complainant dated 05/02/2010.

Ext. A3 series - Original of Lawyer Notice with Acknowledgement due issued by the opposite party dated 18/02/2010.

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party

Nil.

Witness examined on the side of the complainant

Nil.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite party

Nil.