Delhi

North East

CC/305/2024

NARESH JAIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

PRAKASH - Opp.Party(s)

13 May 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 305/24

 

In the matter of:

 

	Sh. Naresh Jain S/o Lt. Sh. Birsen Jain R/o A 36, Sector 53, Noida, U.P 201307 Previously residing at:- C 3/83, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi 110053	Complainant
	Versus
	Prakash R/o C 2/205, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi 110053	Opposite Party

 

 

 

ORDER

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

1. The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer protection Act, 2019 against the Opposite Party i.e. Sh. Pankaj.
2. The case of the Complainant is that Complainant’s son marriage was solemnized on dated 03.07.21 and Opposite Party contacted Complainant requesting job opportunities of photography and videography in ceremonies of the marriage i.e. Sagai on 19.03.21,Mehandi on 25.04.21 etc. and Complainant accepted his proposal i.e.200 photos of sagai/ring ceremony and 250 photos of wedding and album of all functions 90 sheet for a sum of Rs. 45,000/-.The Opposite Party had done work of recording the videography and photography of the ceremonies except mehandi. It is stated that as per request of Opposite Party Complainant had paid Rs. 25,000/- but when Opposite Party produced photos and videos before Complainant, Complainant found that Opposite Party had not done his work properly. It is stated that Opposite Party had not recorded photos and videos of Complainant side. The Opposite Party had intentionally recorded photos and videos of other side especially females. It is stated that Opposite Party had not discharged his duties in proper manner and Complainant moved pillar to post to get his entire claim but Opposite Party is adopting neglecting attitudetowards Complainant. The Opposite Party had also not handed over the photographs and videos till date to Complainant even after completion of job and demanding balance amount from Complainant. Hence, this shows deficiency in service on behalf of Opposite Party.
3. As per the Section 2 (7) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 consumer means any person who-
4.  

(ii)hires or avails of any service for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose.

4. In the present case, the Complainant did not file any document along with his complaint which shows that the Complainant made payment of Rs. 25,000/- to Opposite Party to avail the services of Opposite Party. Hence, the Complainant is not comes under the definition of consumer as per the above-mentioned section of CPA 2019, therefore, the complaint is dismissed.
5. Order announced on 13.05.24.

Copy of this order be given to the Complainant free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)          Member

(Adarsh Nain)     Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma)                 President