Orissa

Kalahandi

CC/34/2022

Pradeep Kumar Choudhary - Complainant(s)

Versus

S.D.O , T.P.W.O.D.L - Opp.Party(s)

S.K Sahu & Associate

09 Nov 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KALAHANDI
NEAR TV CENTRE PADA, BHAWANIPATANA, KALAHANDI
ODISHA, PIN 766001
 
Complaint Case No. CC/34/2022
( Date of Filing : 24 May 2022 )
 
1. Pradeep Kumar Choudhary
S/O Late Khali Choudhary, At/Po/Ps -Narla,
Kalahandi
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. S.D.O , T.P.W.O.D.L
(Formerly known as S.D.O, Electrical (WESCO) At/Po/Ps-Narla
Kalahandi
Odisha
2. Executive Engineer T.P.W.O.D.L
(Formerly known as Executive Engineer ,KEEDE (WESCO) At-Telgubagtipada,Po/Ps-Bhawanipatna, Dist-Kalahandi
3. The Head Admin , T.P.W.O.D.L
At/Po-Burla,Dist-Sambalpur,Odisha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Aswini Kumar Patra PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sudhakar Senapothi MEMBER
 
PRESENT:S.K Sahu & Associate, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 N.R Mishra & Associate, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 09 Nov 2022
Final Order / Judgement

Case record taken up to day for hearing and settlement of dispute .Parties are absent on call. Complainant remain absent even  on the last two date posted for settlement of dispute. However in view of U/s 38(3)(c) of C.P Act.2019 case is taken up for final disposal.

Perused the material available on record. This complaint is filed alleging unfair trade practice on the part of O.Ps and pray for an order directing the O.Ps to release hire amount of vehicle bearing Regd. No. OR 02 AH 1299 amounting to Rs. 1,32,933.26 along with interest @ 6 % PM and further pray for compensation of Rs.50,000/-

It is alleged that the complainant had deployed his four wheeler Tata Sumo bearing Regd. No. OR 02 AH 1299  to the O.Ps on hire basis to maintain his livelihood but the O.Ps could not pay the hire charges from January 2019 to may 2019 in spite of  several approaches which alleged to be unfair trade practice on the part of O.Ps .The complaint allegation is resist by the O.Ps in their written version, so also they challenged the maintainability  of the complaint under C.P Act.

We have given our thought full consideration to the respective contention of the parties Nothing cogent available on record to established that the complaint is a consumer of the O.Ps either of goods or service as defined u/s 2(7) of the C.P Act 2019. As such we are of our considerer view that ,present complaint is not maintainable under C.P Act. 2019. Hence, rejected. However, complaint is at liberty to put forth his grievance before the competetent authority .Case disposed accordingly.

Free copy of this order be supply to the respective parties or they may download the same from the Confonet to treat the same as copy of the order receipt from this Commission.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Aswini Kumar Patra]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sudhakar Senapothi]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.