Orissa

Rayagada

CC/84/2019

Sri Labanyo Mohan Patnaik - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, LIC of India - Opp.Party(s)

Self

19 Dec 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

POST  /  DIST: Rayagada,  STATE:  ODISHA,12.10  Pin No. 765001.

                                                      ******************

C.C.case  No.       84         / 2019.                                    Date.       19  .12. 2019

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar  Mohapatra,                                     President

Sri Gadadhara  Sahu,                                                        Member.

Smt.Padmalaya  Mishra,.                                                Member

 

Sri Labanya Mohan  Pattnaik, /O: Late Dandapani Pattnaik, Raniguda farm,   Po/ Dist:Rayagada(Odisha).                                       …..Complainant.

Versus.

1.The   Branch Manager, LIC of India Corporation,Branch office,Rayagada.

2.The Divisional  Manager, LIC of India, Berhampur(Ganjam).

3.The Zonal Manager, LIC of India, Kolkata, West Bengal.                                                                                                                            …Opposite parties.           

Counsel for the parties:                                 

For the complainant: - Self..

 

                                                JUDGEMENT.

The  curx of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps    for  non payment of  LIC agent commission bearing agent code No.772 / 58C for which  the complainant sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

The case is put up  to day for hearing on admission after office check.  Heard from the complainant at length.

            Section 2 (i) (d) of  the  C.P. Act, 1986   defines  Consumer means any person who buys any goods  or avails of any services   for consideration he is a consumer. We observed  there is no quid proque   between the parties  in this case.

 

In the present case in hand undisputedly  the O.Ps were employer of the complainant and the complainant  was  employee  working   under  the O.P. as agent. Further  non receipt of commission from the  O.Ps  by the complainant   are   service matter.

 

            Now  the issues to be decided by this forum are:-

        Whether this forum  has   jurisdiction to entertain the complaint under the C.P. Act, 1986  ?

While answering  the issue  we would like to refer the citations.  It is held and reported  in CPR-2011(4) page No. 482   the  Hon’ble  National commission,  where in observed  “Conumer forum  can not adjudicate  disputes without  addressing to the basic issues”.  In  another citation  reported in CPJ 2010(1) page No. 136 where in the Hon’ble  State Commission, New Delhi  observed  “Forum should decide the dispute of jurisdiction  first, application kept open to be decided later”.

Admittedly, in the case at hand, the complainant has not availed any service nor purchased any goods from the O.P. for any consideration, as such, he cannot be a ‘consumer’ under them. Only because the Consumer Protection Act is a social benefit oriented Act, it cannot besaid that any body who files a case before the District Forum,as the case may be he can bea ‘consumer’.

By  no   stretch of   imagination an Agent  can raise  any   dispute  regarding his service condition or for payment of  commission  or any   of  his service benefits   before any of the forum  under the Act. The Agent   does not fall under the    definition of a “Consumer” as defined under section 2(i)(d) (ii) of the C.P. Act.  Such commission  is entitled to claim his service benefits   strictly in accordance with his service  conditions and regulations or statutory rules  framed for that purpose. The appropriate forum, for redressal of any  his  grievance, may be the  Civil court but certainly   not a consumer  forum under the Consumer Protection Act,1986.     

On perusal of the  complaint petition this  forum observed  that the matters relating  to non payment of commission  amount by the O.Ps to the complainant will not comes under the purview of the C.P. Act, 1986.  Where there is a special remedy is available to the parties provided by the legislature hence  this  forum did not inclined to invoke its jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.  Hence  this forum has lack of jurisdiction to entertain the  above dispute  and adjudicate  the same under the provisions  of the C.P. Act, 1986.  The case is not maintainable in view of the above discussion.

This forum relied citation of similar type of  case  the Hon’ble State C.D.R.Commission, Cuttack  in  First Appeal No. 727 of 2009  on Dtd. 16.9.2009  in the case of  LIC of India  Vrs. Tirupati Panda, Rayagada  where in observed  “That the case of the complainant  as it was put forth is a simple service matter  and remuneration in lieu   thereof. This dispute can not be entertained  by the Consumer Forum and the Consumer Forum can not pass order  directing  any organization   to make payment  of commission  to the  agent/complainant.

Further it is held and reported in  C.P.R. 2011(4) page No. 128   where in the hon’ble National Commission  observed “Employee is not a consumer of his employer”.

In view of the above discussion and citation  the grievance of the complainant can be raised  before the appropriate court of law and not before this forum. We  do not  think  proper to go  into merit of this case.

Hence, the claim of the   complainant can not be accepted under the provisions of the C.P. Act. It is open to  complainant   ordinary remedy to approach proper forum.       

So  to meet the  ends of justice    the following order is passed.

ORDER.

            In resultant  the complaint petition stands  dismissed. The complainant  is free to approach the court of competent  having  its jurisdiction.   Parties are left to bear their own cost.  Accordingly the case  is closed.

            In  order to keep the door open for the complainant to try his luck  elsewhere for which benefit of exclusion of time  was granted U/S- 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. There is an additional help rendered.

Dictated and corrected by me

Pronounced on this          19 th.          Day of   December,  2019.

 

                Member.                                             Member.                                                             President