BEFORE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ATHYDERABAD

F.A.No.454 OF 2010 AGAINST C.C.No.59 OF 2009 DISTRICT FORUMRAJAHMUNDRY

Between                                           

1.                         

2.                                 

M/s Kaki Fancy, rep. by its proprietor
Kaki Seshagiri Rao, age 55 years,
occ: Business,Main Road, Opp: Bata Show Room
Rajahmundry

                                                       Counsel for the Appellants                   

Counsel for the Respondent                 

 QUORUM:       SRI R.LAKSHMINARSIMHA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER

Oral Order ( As per R.Lakshminarsimha Rao, Member)
      appeal arises from the order of the District Forum whereby the opposite parties were directed to pay the amount of Rs.57,904/- towards the value of the stock sent through the opposite party courier, with interest and costs.

The respondent is a fancy goods shop and it purchased school bags and travel bags from M/s Vardhaman Enterprises at Mumbai, on 10-04-2006 goods worth 

The respondent contended that the goods were not delivered to it   

The appellants resisted the claim contending  

The respondent filed his affidavit and the documents,ExA1 to A8.The branch manager of the second appellant company has filed his affidavit and the documents ExB1 to B3.

The District Forum allowed the complaint on the premise that the respondent lodged claim within stipulated time and got issued notice dated 23-03-2007 claiming damages and the appellants failed to pay the declared value of the goods.

Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the opposite parties filed the appeal contending that the District Forum has not considered the contention of the appellants which is question of law. The mandatory notice under Carrier’s Act is not issued within the stipulated period and that the complaint was not filed within the period of limitation. The respondent did not insure the consignment.

The points for consideration are:

1. Whether the complaint is maintainable under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act?

2. Whether the complaint is filed within the period of limitation?

3. Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the appellants?

4. To what relief?

POINT NO.1:   

The question of jurisdiction is one of the vital aspect for a court or tribunal since it involves the challenge to the very competence of or tribunal. The order or decree passed by the court or tribunal is not treated on the same footing where it passed without territorial jurisdiction and pecuniary jurisdiction and the jurisdiction as to the subject matter as well. The order passed without the jurisdiction of the subject matter is no order in the eye of law as the very power required to pass the order or decree is lacking in the court or tribunal. The territorial     

         Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act provides for the person who buys goods for his own use and not for resale or commercial purpose. The word ‘commercial’ is an adjective defining the nature of a transaction or activity irrespective of the fact whether that transaction or activity is on a large scale or on a small scale. 

       :    

                                                                       MEMBER

                                                                                                                             KMK*