BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM<br /> VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.<br /> PRESENT<br /> SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER<br /> I.A.No. 655/2006<br /> in<br /> C.C.No. 48/2006<br /> Dated : 31.10.2008<br /> Complainant:<br /> J. John Kennedy, Prop. M/s Kerala Furniture Mart, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram residing at T.C 11/2791, Kurunganoorvila Puthen Veedu, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram. <br /> <br /> (By adv. J.K. Ajith Prasad) <br /> Opposite parties:<br /> <br /> 1.The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, represented by its Divisional Manager, Divisional Office-11, St. Mary Villa, Medical College P.O, Ulloor, Thiruvananthapuram – 11.<br /> <br /> (By adv. S.S. Kalkura)<br /> <br /> 2.The Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. Represented by its Manager, Palayam, Thiruvananthapuram. <br /> <br /> (By adv. K.B. Pandarathil)<br /> This complaint is disposed of after the period so specified under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Though the case was taken up for orders by the predecessors of this Forum on 03.07.2006, the order was not prepared accordingly. This Forum assumed office on 08.02.2008. This O.P having been taken as heard on 10.09.2008, the Forum on 31.10.2008 delivered the following:<br /> ORDER <br /> SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD: PRESIDENT<br /> 2nd opposite party has applied for hearing the maintainability of the complaint. It has been contended by the 2nd opposite party that the complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation and that the cause of action for the complaint stated in the complaint is on 28.03.2000 and the complaint is filed only in February 2006. 2nd opposite party further contends that the father of the complainant deceased Sri. D. Joseph had availed a loan for Rs. 500000/- from the 2nd opposite party on 11.01.1996 on executing promissory note and other loan documents and that late D. Joseph also created an equitable mortgage by depositing title deeds with respect to his property of 4 cents and the shop room T.C 3/2-19 in which Kerala Furniture Mart, Pattom is situated. As per request of the loanee Joseph an insurance policy was taken from the 1st opposite party. 2nd opposite party further submits that the loanee defaulted payment of loan amount and interest and that the loan was under lapse sanction as the borrower has not submitted request with statements records. Complainant filed objection to the maintainability petition. It has been contended by the complainant that D. Joseph expired on 14.05.1997 and complainant became the proprietor of M/s Kerala Furniture Mart by virtue of the Will Deed and that the name of the proprietor in the records of opposite parties is to be changed from D. Joseph to John Kennedy. Complainant further submits that opposite parties informed him that the name of the Proprietor cannot be changed because the loan is pending and at the time of closing the loan alone the name can be changed. 1st opposite party and 2nd opposite party filed version in which the main contention is that the complaint is barred by limitation. In view of the above, the main point to be considered is whether the complainant is a consumer and whether it is barred by limitation. <br /> <br /> It has been the case of the complainant that his father D. Joseph had availed loan from the 2nd opposite party and that after the death of his father on 14.05.1997 complainant became the proprietor of M/s Kerala Furniture Mart by virtue of the Will Deed No. 139/96. Further the petitioner/2nd opposite party and 1st opposite party have raised the contention in the version that the complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation. 1st opposite party has raised a contention in the version that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and this opposite party and hence this complainant has no locus standi to file this complaint as there is no consumer relationship of any nature. 1st opposite party further contends that they are unaware of the fact that whether the complainant is the proprietor of M/s Kerala Furniture Mart. On going through the complaint, the complainant himself admitted that his father expired on 14.05.1997 and requested the opposite party that the name of Proprietor of M/s Kerala Furniture Mart is to be changed from D. Joseph to John Kennedy, for which the complainant submits that opposite party informed him that the said name cannot be changed since the loan is pending and the name can be changed only after the closure of loan. In view of the above pleading of the complainant, it is crystal clear that complainant is not the proprietor nor did the Will reveal the complainant as the proprietor of the said M/s Kerala Furniture Mart. Along with complaint, complainant has produced a copy of the policy-schedule wherein the name and address of the insured is CSB/Palayam/Mr.D. Joseph, proprietor, M/s Kerala Furniture Mart, policy period is 25.01.2000 to 24.01.2001. From the said policy-schedule, it is apparent that policy is taken in the name of CSB (2nd opposite party) and one Mr. D. Joseph, who according to the complaint expired on 14.05.1997. If that be so, the policy itself is in the name of a dead person. As such the policy is void ab initio. In view of the above, complainant does not come within the meaning of consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. Complainant has no locus standi to file this complaint. In the above circumstance, the question of limitation requires no consideration. <br /> <br /> In the result, the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable. <br /> <br /> A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.<br /> <br /> Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the day of 31st October 2008.<br /> <br /> G. SIVAPRASAD, President.<br /> <br /> S.K.SREELA : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />