Kerala

Idukki

CC/165/2018

Thomas Ulahannan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary Mariyapuram Gramma Panchayath - Opp.Party(s)

Adv.K B Selvam

31 Aug 2021

ORDER

DATE OF FILING : 11.9.2018

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION IDUKKI

Dated this the 31^st  day of August, 2021

Present :

SRI. C. SURESHKUMAR                  PRESIDENT

SRI. AMPADY K.S.                           MEMBER

CC NO.165/2018

Between

Complainant                                       :    Thomas Ulahannan, 

                                                                 Thayyil House,

                                                                  Narakakkanam P.O.,

                                                                  Thankamany, Idukki.

And

Opposite Party                                    :     The Secretary,

                                                                  Mariyapuram  Grama Panchayath,

                                                                  Mariyapuram.

                                                                   Represented Mariyapuram

                                                                             Grama Panchayath          

                                                                         (By Adv: Babichen V. George)

 

O R D E R

 

SRI. AMPADY K.S., MEMBER

 

          Main allegations of the complainant are as under :-

1 .  He was a small trader and was conducting business in the building of opposite party.    Room allotted to him in 2013 and he got the room for rent through auction conducted.  Rent originally fixed at Rs.300/- p.m.  From the next year auction was withdrawn and he received the shop room with 5% increase of existing rent for further years.  He deposited Rs.4680/- as security and no rent is due.

                                                                                                          (cont....2)

• 2  -

2 .  On 3.3.2018, opposite party informed the complainant to renew agreement for next year and he went there to renew the same.  Then opposite party was not willing to renew the agreement.  Opposite party asked some additional amount for this.  Since  he was not willing to give the said sum, opposite  party threatened him to evict from the shop room. 

3 . Then he filed complaint against opposite party before this Commission as CC 67/2018.  On moving this case, opposite party approached and requested him to withdraw the complaint and told that opposite party is ready to renew the agreement as per prior terms and conditions.  So, he withdrew the complaint and continued in the same building.

4 .  On 26.4.2018 evening at 5’o clock, opposite party came to his residence and informed that he is going to be evicted from shop room.  Then, without any proper notice and information, he was evicted from there on the same day.  No time was given to take any precautionary steps for taking back any of the furniture and shelves.  Two shelves are still in the custody of above panchayath.   He became mentally weak and fell down.  Two weighing scales worth Rs.25000/- became useless, furnishing and 2 goods stand worth Rs.15000/- is also lost.  His customers owe him about Rs.50000/-.  Moreover, opposite party issued notice to him to deposit Rs.5000/- as compensation.

5 .  Actions of the opposite party is serious deficiency in service which is to be compensated and also it is against his consumer rights. 

          Hence he prayed for the following reliefs.

1. Direct the opposite party to stop all recovery steps against him.
2. Allow compensation Rs.1 lakh for his total loss.
3. Such other reliefs as may be granted.

Opposite party filed written version on the following lines.

1 .  Complainant taken the shop room on rent for a monthly rent of Rs.300/- from 2013-14 and it continued upto 2017-18 on payment of 5% increase in rent every year to the existing rent.  As per rent agreement executed for 2017-18, it was stated                                                                                                      (cont....3)

• 3  -

that rent at the rate of Rs.390/- p.m. to be paid before 5^th of next month and in case of default thereof it has to be paid with penal interest at the rate of 24% before 5^th of the succeeding month.  If this also is not complied with, shop room to be vacated and make good the loss occurred to Panchayath.  But rent dues from June 2017 to September 2017 was remitted with penal interest on 17.10.2017 and this is violation of the rent agreement.  Averment of the complainant that there was no dues for this period is wrong.

2 .  As per the decision No.10/1 taken on 17.2.2018 by the Panchayath, it was decided to increase the rent of shop room situated except Idukki town by 25%.  Complainant applied for renewal of rent on 3.3.2018.  But on 12.3.2018, Panchayath Committee took decision not to give the said shop room to the complainant since he has violated rent agreement and also to give the shop room on a monthly rent of Rs.1000/- to one Benny Loukose who is a cancer patient on humanitarian grounds.  This  decision was communicated to the complainant as per letter No.B2-621/2018 dated 26.3.2018 and directed him to vacate on attaining the period of rent.  So paragraph 2 of complaint is against facts. 

3 .  Complaint filed CC 67/2018 before this Forum.  No compulsion was made to withdraw this complaint.  As per order dated 30.5.2018 of this Commission, it is stated that complainant applied to withdraw the above complaint for seeking relief through Hon’ble High Court.  It is not true that complainant continued business in the shop room after withdrawing the complaint.  After giving sufficient time to vacate, he was evicted from there on 27.4.2018.  Thereafter, he had not conducted business there.

4 .  On 26.3.2018, notice No.B.2.612/2018 was delivered at the residence of complainant.  Since, he has not vacated the shop room, notice was affixed at the business premises on 17.4.2018.  Eventhen he has not vacated the premises.  Hence as per Order No.B.2.612/18,  he was evicted from the shop room No.7/140 on 27.4.2018 with the aid of Police Officials.  As per report of the employee who effected eviction, 2 numbers timber shelves and 3 numbers old and decayed timber bones (Xpem-§v) was there which is owned by the complainant.  Complainant has signed in the mahazar prepared.  Above items and goods were taken outside and eviction was effected.  No property of the complainant was attached by the                                                                                                                                  (cont....4)

• 4  -

Panchayath.  Since  he has not vacated the premises in time, in order to compensate loss occurred to the Panchayath for eviction and also for the loss in rent in not giving the room to another person, notice dated 20.6.2018 demanding Rs.5000/- for above was given to the complainant as per Panchayath Raj Rules.  But he has not given any reply till date.

5 . Person who takes the shop room owned by the Panchayath on rent through mutual agreement and auction is not a ‘Consumer’.

          Since the complainant was evicted through legal process due to the failure on the part of complainant, opposite party prayed for not to proceed with the complaint.

          Complainant filed proof affidavit and additional affidavit.  Examined as PW1 and marked 5 copies of following documents as Exts.P1 to P5.  (1) Ext.P1 – Cash receipt dated 12.2.2018 remitting rent by complainant from January to March 2018 with fine.  (2) Ext.P2 – Statement of accounts of CC loan taken by complainant.  (3) Ext.P3 – Acknowledgement dated 28.4.2018 in respect of receipt of application for refund of security deposits.  (4) Ext.P4 – Report prepared by Biju V., Senior Clerk of opposite party in respect of eviction proceedings.  (5) Ext.P5 – Page No.24 of Register of Rented building of (blank)  for the year 2018-19.  (6) Ext.P6 – Page No.7 of Register of rented building of  (blank) for the year  (blank).  (Ext.P4 to 6 marked with objection). 

          Opposite party filed proof affidavit and produced copy of 13 documents which were marked as Exts.R1 to R13.  Examined as RW1.  Ext.R1 – Agreement No.06/2017-18 executed by complainant in favour of opposite party.  (2)  Ext.R2 – Application dated 3.3.2017 of complainant for renewal of rent agreement.  (3)  Ext.R3 – Letter No.B2.621/2018 of opposite party dated 26.3.2018 requesting to vacate the shop room.  (4) Ext.R4 – Reminder letter No.B2.621/18 dated 17.4.2018 of opposite party requesting to vacate the shop room.  (5) Ext.R5 – Proceedings dated 24.4.2018 of opposite party for eviction of complainant.  (6) Ext.R6 – Report of Senior Clerk of opposite party regarding eviction proceedings.  (7)  Ext.R7 – Notice dated 20.6.2018 issued by opposite party for recovering loss of Rs.5000/-.  (8) Ext.R8 – Decision No.10/1 dated 17.2.2018 taken by opposite party for                                                                                                                        (cont....5)

 

• 5  -

revising rent of shops owned by them. (9) Ext.R9 – Letter dated 3.3.2018 given by Mr. Benny Joseph requesting the opposite party to give the concerned shop room on rent of Rs.1000/- to him.  (10) Ext.R10 – Decision No.18/2 dated 12.3.2018 for allowing the shop room No.7/140 to Benny Joseph.  (11)  Ext.R11 – Letter dated 26.4.2018 of opposite party requesting Station  House Officer, Thankamany Police Station for police protection for eviction of complainant from above shop room.  (12)  Ext.R12 – Order of this Commission dated 30.5.2018 in CC 67/2018.   (13) Ext.R13 -  Additional legible copy of Ext.R1 marked as  Ext.R13.

          Heard both sides.

          We have examined the rival contentions and perused the evidences adduced from both sides. 

          On a perusal of above, following points arise for consideration. 

1. Whether the complainant is a ‘consumer as’ defined in Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ?
2. Is there any deficiency in service from the part of opposite party ?
3. Reliefs.

        On a consideration of the facts and evidences, we find that allegation of the complainant is that he was evicted from the occupied shop room without complying with legal formalities.  There is no dispute with regard to the relationship of tenant based on agreement between both parties.  Complainant has not raised any allegation with regard to any deficiency in service offered by opposite party.  In the light of nature of the allegations raised by complainant, the 1^st and 2^nd  points are considered together.   It is the contention of the opposite party that a ‘tenant’ is not a ‘consumer’ under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.  Since there is no allegation with regard to non-performance of any offered services, it cannot be said that there is deficiency in service by opposite party.  While going through the definition of ‘consumer’, we find that a person who took a room or building for rent from another person as a ‘tenant’ does not come within the ambit of the above definition.  This position is well settled by the decision of the Hon’ble  Supreme Court in case No.502/1992 decided on                                                                                                                             (cont....6)

 

• 6  -

21.11.2000 in Laxmiben Laxmichand Shah Vs. Sakeerben Kanji Chandan and others reported in 2001(9) SCC 604.  In the light of above decision, we find that complainant is not a ‘consumer’ as defined in the Consumer Protection Act.

          For the above reasons, the 1^st and 2^nd points are decided against the complainant.

          Since  above points are decided against the complainant, 3^rd point does not deserve any consideration.

          In these circumstances, we dismiss the complaint as not sustainable before this Commission.

          This will not preclude the complainant from seeking appropriate legal remedy under any other law.

          Pronounced by this Commission on this the 31^st day of August, 2021

 

                                                         SRI. AMPADY K.S. , MEMBER       

    

     SRI. C. SURESHKUMAR, PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1 -  Thomas

On the side of the Opposite Party :

DW1 -   Vinukumar                                                                                                                                                                                                          (cont....7)

• 7  -

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 –  Cash receipt dated 12.2.2018 remitting rent by complainant from

               January to March 2018 with fine. 

Ext.P2 – Statement of accounts of CC loan taken by complainant. 

Ext.P3 – Acknowledgement dated 28.4.2018 in respect of receipt of application for

               refund of security deposits

Ext.P4 – Report prepared by Biju V., Senior Clerk of opposite party in respect of

               eviction proceedings. 

Ext.P5 – Page No.24 of Register of Rented building of  ......... for the year 2018-19.  Ext.P6 – Page No.7 of Register of rented building of  ..... for the year  ... . 

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Ext.R1 -  Agreement No.06/2017-18 executed by complainant in favour of

    opposite party. 

Ext.R2 – Application dated 3.3.2017 of complainant for renewal of rent agreement.  Ext.R3 – Letter No.B2.621/2018 of opposite party dated 26.3.2018 requesting

     to vacate the shop room. 

Ext.R4 – Reminder letter No.B2.621/18 dated 17.4.2018 of opposite party

                requesting to vacate the shop room. 

Ext.R5 – Proceedings dated 24.4.2018 of opposite party for eviction of

                complainant. 

Ext.R6 – Report of Senior Clerk of opposite party regarding eviction proceedings.  Ext.R7 – Notice dated 20.6.2018 issued by opposite party for recovering loss

    of Rs.5000/-. 

Ext.R8 – Decision No.10/1 dated 17.2.2018 taken by opposite party for revising

               rent of shops owned by them.

Ext.R9 – Letter dated 3.3.2018 given by Mr. Benny Joseph requesting the opposite

               party to give the concerned shop room on rent of Rs.1000/- to him. 

Ext.R10 – Decision No.18/2 dated 12.3.2018 for allowing the shop room No.7/140

       to Benny Joseph. 

Ext.R11 – Letter dated 26.4.2018 of opposite party requesting Station  House

                 Officer, Thankamany Police Station for police protection for eviction

       of complainant from above shop room. 

Ext.R12 – Order of this Commission dated 30.5.2018 in CC 67/2018.  

Ext.R13 -  Additional legible copy of Ext.R1 marked as  Ext.R13.

                                                                                        Forwarded by Order,