26.04.2023

ORDER ON ADMISSION

BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

The Appellant/Complainant has preferred this appeal against the dismissal order dt.31.10.2022 passed in CC.No.859/2013 by the IV Additional District Consumer Commission, Bengaluru which dismissed the complaint and submits that the complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency in service in not properly constructing the 5^th floor of the property and prayed for refund of an amount of Rs.15,14,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs and fourteen thousand) as assessed by one Ganga consultancy    and to pay tune of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only)  towards compensation.

2.      After trial the District Commission comes to conclusion that the matter requires elaborate evidence and there is an issue of complex questions which cannot be adjudicated in summarily before this Commission.  Hence, dismissed the complaint and liberty was given to the complainant to approach the appropriate authority.  In fact, the District Commission was assigned for adjudicating the matter of consumer dispute arose between the parties.  The complainant a simply alleged unfair trade practice in not constructing properly by OP.  In this regard, they have appointed the Court Commissioner to assess the value of the construction and quality of the construction also.  The District Commission without considering the said Court Commissioner report and allegations have rejected the claim of the complainant as it is a complicated one.  The District Commission has not followed the provision of the Consumer Protection Act.  In fact, the District Commission was established for the purpose of adjudicating the matters like this.  Hence, prays to set aside the order passed by the District Commission and restore the matter for adjudication before District Commission.  

3.      Heard from appellant on admission.

          4.      On perusal of the certified copy of the order and memorandum of appeal, we noticed that, the complainant had filed a complaint against OP alleging defect in construction and claim for a compensation to the tune of Rs.15,14,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs and fourteen thousand) along with Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) as compensation.  After admission, the District Commission issued a notice to the Respondent and Respondent also filed version. Subsequently, one Court Commissioner was appointed to assess the loss caused to the complainant and also to assess the quality of the construction, the District Commission after accepting the allegations, versions and Court Commissioner report ought to adjudicate the matter after obtaining the evidence from both the parties.  Instead of that, the District Commission washed their hands by stating that the matter involved is a complicated questions and it requires elaborate evidence and a complex issue was arose between the parties and dismissed the complaint. We are of the opinion, the District Commission ought to go through the evidence of both the parties in detail and also go through the additional evidence if any produced by parties along with Court Commissioner report for determining the dispute raised by the Complainant, they cannot dismiss the complaint on the above said grounds as mentioned in the order.  The District Commission is established for the purpose of adjudicating the matter in summarily that does not mean that the District Commission should not accept the detailed evidence and documents produced by both the parties.   It is a duty of the District Commission to adjudicate the matter in detail as per the evidence produced by both the parties.  As such the order passed by the District Commission lacks legality.  Therefore, the order passed by the District Commission is hereby set aside the matter is remand back to the District Commission to try on merits. Accordingly the appeal is allowed and we proceed to pass the following:- 

O R D E R

The appeal is allowed. No order as to cost.

The impugned order dated 31-10-2022 passed by the IV Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. Bengaluru in CC.No.859/2013 is set-aside. 

The District Commission further directed to restore the original complaint in its original number and adjudicate the matter on merits and dispose expeditiously after appreciating the expert evidence and documents produced by both the parties.

Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Consumer Commission.

(Sunita .C. Bagewadi)                           (Ravishankar)       

            Member                                    Judicial Member

SP*