Dtd.13.08.2024                                            A/77/2024

O R D E R

      BY Mr.K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : Pri.Dist & Session Judge (R) - JUDICIAL MEMBER.

1.    This is an appeal filed U/s.41 of CPA 2019 by Complainant/Appellant aggrieved by the order dtd.30.10.2023 passed in CC/19/2023 on the file of Chitradurga District Commission. (Parties to the appeal henceforth are referred to their rank assigned to them by the District Commission).
2. The Commission examined grounds of appeal, impugned order, appeal papers and heard.
3. Now, the point that arise for consideration of this Commission would be whether the impugned order dtd.30.10.2023 passed in CC/19/2023 does call for an interference of this Commission for the grounds set out in the appeal memo ?
4. Learned counsel submits that the District Commission had committed grave error in dismissing the consumer complaint on the ground that Complainant is not a consumer and OP is  service provider. In this regard submits that, OP had   received Rs.2 lakhs through bank transfer to his account with  Karnataka Bank, Davanagere branch from the Canara bank account at Chitradurga branch. According to complainant  had received the such amount towards supply of water tanker, since  OP had failed to deliver the water tanker as agreed, Appellant/Complainant could not able to feed water to  10000 mango saplings, 10000 honge saplings and 10000 cashew saplings. Thus, if we accept these facts suffice to hold that complainant is a consumer and the OP is a service provider, was not considered by the District Commission.  In order to substantiate the relationship of consumer and service provider between the parties to the complaint in his complaint had categorically stated the facts. It could also to be taken notice of the fact that during the course of enquiry complainant in his   affidavit evidence had reiterated the contents of complaint supported by documents. It is also to be noted herein OP is declared exparte, yet the District Commission, failed to   appreciate the materials placed on record proceeded to dismiss the complaint holding Complainant has failed to prove himself as consumer within the meaning of Sec.2(7) and OP as service provider within the definition of S.2(42) of CPA 2019 which in our view contrary to the facts and law is liable to be set aside. Accordingly proceed to allow the appeal. Consequently set aside the impugned order dtd.30.10.2023 passed in CC/19/2013 on the file of Chitradurga District Commission and as a result, directed District Commission to readmit the complaint and decide the complaint on merits as early as possible not later than three months from the date of receipt of this order. Further directed to issue notice to OP, since he has been served with appeal notice in this appeal is recorded as absentee party to provide yet an another opportunity to assist the Commission to participate in the complaint proceedings.
5. Notify copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties.

   Lady Member                                Judicial Member               

*NS*