BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 25th day of August, 2009

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.4/2009

Between

Complainant : Nazeera W/o Nazar,

KSEB Quarters No.F-4B,

Idukki Colony P.O,

Vazhathoppu,

Idukki District.

(By Adv: V.K.Shaji)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The Proprietor,

Rani Mushroom,

Reg.No.ICSW C/S 635/2001,

Regional Office,

Thodupuzha East P.O,

Thodupuzha.

2. The Branch Manager,

ISAFF,

Cheruthony Branch,

Idukki Colony P.O,

(By Adv: K.J.Thomas)

O R D E R

SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)

This is a complaint alleging deficiency in service against the opposite party who are the proprietor Rani Mushroom and the Branch Manager, ISAFF. The second opposite party conducted a training camp about the mushroom cultivation in their office. The complainant also participated in the training camp and she gave order for the mushroom seeds. On 15.02.2008, the complainant gave Rs.1,500/- as advance for the mushroom seeds to the 1^st opposite party. But evenafter one months, the 1^st opposite party did not give the mushroom seeds to the complainant. Though the complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party's office on several occasion, the opposite party did not give the mushroom seeds or refund the advance amount. Alleging deficiency in service against the opposite party, the complaint has been filed.

2. The 1^st opposite party was called ex-parte and no written version has been filed.

3. In the written version filed by the 2^nd opposite party a contention has been raised that the complaint is not legally maintainable, because the complainant is not a consumer of the 2^nd opposite party. No service was hired nor any goods was purchased for consideration by the complainant, from the 2^nd opposite party. The complainant is not a member of the 2^nd opposite party's "Sangam". On 12.02.2008 the 2^nd opposite party conducted a training camp about the mushroom cultivation, but the complainant has not participated because she is not a member of the 2^nd opposite party's society. The 2^nd opposite party’s firm has 2015 members. The opposite party gives loans and other facilities to the member only. The complainant is not a consumer of the 2^nd opposite party, since she has neither gave any order for mushroom seeds nor participate classes. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the 2^nd opposite party.

4. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?

5. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Ext.P1 marked on the side of the complainant and the oral testimony of DW1 and Ext.R1 marked on the side of the opposite parties.

6. The POINT:- The 2^nd opposite party has contended that the complaint is not maintainable since no service has been rendered by them to the complainant. The contention is against the true facts. It is admitted that the 2^nd opposite party has conducted the training class on 12.02.2008 and the copy of the minutes book of the ISAFF is produced. As per DW1, the 2^nd opposite party has admitted that the OP1 has taken the classes about the cultivation of mushroom seeds. The advance fee was Rs.1,500/- for the mushroom seeds. Ext.R1 is the copy of the minutes book. But in the Ext.R1, the place and time is not mentioned. PW1 stated that the 1^st opposite party came to their residence and paid Rs.1,500/- as advance for 10 packets of mushroom seeds. Ext.P1 is the receipt for Rs.1,500/- dated 15.02.2008. But the 1^st opposite party did not give the mushroom seeds. In this case, DW1 has admitted that they have organised the classes and the OP1 took the class on 12.02.2008, but the complainant has not attended the class. Ext.R1 is only a copy of the minutes book (two pages) dated 12.02.2008. The place or time has not mentioned in Ext.R1 and the complainant's name is also not mentioned. So Ext.R1 is not believable. We could not say that the complainant has not attended the class on 12.02.2008 because the original minutes book is not produced before the Forum. There is no justification on the part of the opposite party. In Ext.R1 document states that they received orders from the parties for the mushroom seeds and the registration fees is Rs.1,500/-. At the time of the argument, 2^nd opposite party admitted that they received orders from the parties and gave receipt for registration fees. It is a gross deficiency on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant has every right to get back the advance amount Rs.1,500/- paid by her. We have considered the stand point of both sides and are of the opinion that the suitable solution is to direct the 1^st opposite party to refund the advance amount which is Rs.1,500/- evidenced by Ext.P1 receipt with 12% interest from the date of filing the petition. In the circumstances of the case the complainant is entitled to the costs of this petition which we would limit to Rs.1,000/-.

In the result, the petition allowed. The 1^st opposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,500/- to the complainant as per the Ext.P1 receipt with 12% interest from the date of filing the petition. The 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- as costs of this petition within one month of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest from the date of default.

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25^th day of August, 2009

Sd/-

SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)

Sd/-

I agree SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

I agree SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of Complainant :

PW1 - A.H.Abdul Nazar

On the side of Opposite Parties :

DW1 - Mini Mathew

Exhibits:

On the side of Complainant:

Ext.P1 - Receipt dated 15^th February, 2008 for Rs.1,500/-

On the side of Opposite Parties:

Ext.R1 - Photocopy of Minutes Book