CC Filed on 01.12.2011
Disposed on 07.01.2012
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOLAR
Dated: 7th day of January 2012
PRESENT:
HON’BLE T. RAJASHEKHARAIAH ….. PRESIDENT
HON’BLE T.NAGARAJA ….. MEMBER
HON’BLE K.G.SHANTALA, ….. MEMBER
Consumer Complaint No. 217/2011
Between:
Sri. Arjunappa, S/o. Munivenkatappa, Mestri & Building Contractor, Chinnakote Village, Sooregowdana Kote-Post, Bangarapet Taluk. (By Advocate Sri. K.R. Srinivasaiah) | ….Complainant |
V/SSri. Rajashekhar, W/o. Late Parameswara, Aged about 47 years, Wisdom Book Centre, Ganesh Temple Street, Near Banyan Tree, BEML Nagar, KGF, R/o. No. 557, Shiva Nivas, M.V. Nagar, Near Bharath Nagar Water Tank, BEML Nagar Post, KGF. | ….Opposite Party |
ORDER
This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
2. Complainant contends that he has entered into contract for construction of the building of the OP vide agreement dated 28.04.2011. The Complainant has completed the construction work to the satisfaction of the OP. The OP has not paid Rs.66,350/- relating to the cost of the construction even though he has completed construction. Hence, this Complaint is filed for directing the OP to pay Rs.66,350/- with cost.
3. The case was posted to hear the Complainant regarding admission. Complaint was heard regarding admission.
4. The question that arises for consideration is whether there is sufficient cause to proceed with the Complaint.
5. Our finding on the above is in the negative. In our opinion, there is no sufficient cause to proceed with the Complaint for the following reasons.
REASONS
6. There is no relationship of the consumer and the service provider between the Complainant and the OP. Complainant is not a consumer, because he has not availed any service from the OP for consideration. On the other hand, Complainant himself was the service provider and the consumer was the OP. Hence, the Complainant cannot be said to be a consumer. When the Complainant is not a consumer, the dispute between them cannot be called as consumer dispute. Hence, complaint is not maintainable. When the Complaint is not maintainable, no useful purpose will be served by proceeding with such complaint. Hence, Complaint is liable to be dismissed at the stage of admission. Hence, we pass the following order:
O R D E R
It is held that Complainant is not a consumer. There is no consumer dispute between the parties and the Complaint is not maintainable. Hence, there is no reason to proceed with the Complaint and the Complaint is dismissed at the stage of admission.
Dictated to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced in open Forum this the 7th day of January 2012.
T. NAGARAJA K.G.SHANTALA T. RAJASHEKHARAIAH
Member Member President
