D.o.F:23/11/2010
D.o.O:17/2/2011
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.NO.241/10
Dated this, the 17th day of February 2011
PRESENT:
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
J.Muhammed
S/o Aboobacker, MGP House No.7/08,
Pullarakatta House, Moodamvail Po, : Complainant
Via Manjeshwar,Kasaragod
( Adv.M.A.Johnson,Kasaragod)
1. Rafeeq.M.M, S/o Muhammad Kunhi Haji,
Nerahalli House,Moodamvail Po, Manjeshwar
2. Regional Transport Officer, : Opposite parties
Regional Passport Office, Collectorate Complex,
Vidyanagar,Kasaragod.
ORDER REGARDING THE ISSUE OF MAINTAINABILITY OF THE COMPLAINT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
Heard the counsel for the complainant for admission of the complaint. This is a complaint filed by the complainant seeking an order directing the opposite party No.2 to change the timing of the stage carriage bus bearing reg.No.KL-14/J 8197 belongs to the complainant and also for an order directing the opposite parties to compensate the financial loss caused to the complainant because of sanctioning of youte permit to 1st opposite party.
In our view complainant is not a consumer and the dispute mentioned here in is not a consumer dispute as envisaged under the Consumer Protection Act. Complainant has no case that he availed any service from opposite parties by paying consideration. Moreover the complaint is relating to a granting of permit under the Motor Vehicles Act. Chapter V of the Motor Vehicles Act deals with the Control of Transport Vehicles Sec.69 to 72 deals with the application: for permit, Procedure of RTA in considering application for stage carriage permit, grant of stage carriage permit etc. Any person aggrieved in the order of the Transport Authority can approach the State Transport Appellate Tribunal constituted under the Motor Vehicles Act U/S 89 of MV Act. As far as the granting of permit is concerned ,Motor Vehicles Act is a special Act. Ordinarily the general law must yield to special law. Therefore complainant ought to have take recourse to the statutory authorities constituted under the Motor Vehicles Act, which is a special law as far as this complaint is concerned.
That being so, we dismiss the complaint holding that complainant is neither a consumer nor the dispute involved is a consumer dispute.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
eva