The complainant’s case in brief is as follows: The complainant had joined in the kuri No.DC.13/07 conducted by the second respondent. Having completed all the transaction in the said chitty the complainant received back the documents submitted along with the kuri except the cheque leaf given as security. On enquiry it was found that the said cheque leaf was produced before the Judicial Ist Class Magistrate Court, Thrissur in the case of ST 2730/06. It was also informed that that case will be withdrawn on 12.9.2006 on its trial day. But the complainant was arrested on 20.9.06 in the midst of public and produced before the court. Later at 4.30 p.m. he was released since there was no case against him.   The respondents have acted intentionally to cheat the complainant and put him into trouble. Hence the complaint.

 

            2. The respondents have filed counter as follows: The complaint is not maintainable. The cheque given by the complainant was dishonoured and thus he has committed crime under Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 and the complainant failed to present before the Magistrate Court after receiving summons and the court issued warrant against him. Even though the complainant paid the amount at the respondent firm he was arrested on the basis of the warrant issued earlier and the complainant was only liable for his arrest. It was his responsibility to get the withdrawal memo of warrant before getting him arrested. Hence dismiss the complaint.

 

            3. The issue of maintainability is heard. 

 

            4. The complaint is filed against the respondents to get compensation for defamation, which was arising out of the malicious prosecution. According to the complainant the 2^nd respondent after settlement of the transaction between them, misused one cheque leaf and filed a complaint against the complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. According to the complainant in order to attend the case he was forced to appear before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court and waited there till 4.30 p.m. This complaint is filed to get compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant in this regard. This is not a matter to be filed before the Consumer Forum and complainant is not a consumer as envisaged under the Consumer Protection Act. There is not any acceptance of service from the respondents for consideration and committed no deficiency in service. There is also not any acceptance of goods for consideration. So in the strict sense complainant is not a consumer and the complaint is liable to be dismissed to file before Civil Court.

 

            5. In the result, complaint stands dismissed with direction to approach proper Forum.