DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 14th day of October, 2022
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member
Date of Filing: 30.01.2020
CC/20/2020
K J Ouseph Joy,
Director, Ramble Hire Purchase Pvt Ltd,
Door No.25/317 (2), Saja Complex,
Vennakara Road, Near KSRTC Bus Stand,
Palakkad.
Corporate Office at Door No.10/40-1,
NH By Pass Junction, Mannuthy,
Thrissur- 680 651. Rept. By its
(By Adv.Sreenath S ) - Complainants
Vs
Manager,
South Indian Bank Ltd.,
Palakkad Main Branch. - Opposite party
(By Advs.G Ananthakrishnan and K B Priya)
O R D E R
By Smt.Vidya A., Member
Pleadings of the complainant in brief.
- The complainant is the director of a Limited company namely ‘Ramble Hire Purchase Pvt Ltd. and is engaged in the business of money lending based on hire purchase agreement. He is represented by POA Holder.
The complainant had maintained an account No. 0063073000003613 with Palakkad Main branch of the opposite party and is a regular customer of the opposite party Bank. He presented a cheque on 05.11.2018 for Rs.65,000/- bearing cheque no. 013840 drawn on Puthur Panchayath Agriculture and Non-Agriculture Laborer Co-Operative Society Ltd. for collection through his account maintained with the opposite party. But the cheque was not collected or returned. After one week the complainant approached the opposite party and enquired about the cheque, but they could not give any intimation regarding the cheque. In spite of repeated requests made by the complainant, the opposite party did not provide any intimation. The complainant caused issuance of a lawyer notice dated 26.09.2019 to the opposite party.
The action of the opposite party is a clear case of direliction, deficiency in service and negligence. Since the opposite party did not give any intimation regarding the cheque, the complainant is unable to know whether the same is collected or dishonored or lost and he is unable to get the cash owing to the inaction of opposite party. So this complaint is filed for directing the opposite party to pay (1) Rs.65,000/- being the amount covered by the cheque and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.5000/- towards cost of the proceeding.
- After admitting complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party and the opposite party entered appearance and filed version.
- Pleadings of the opposite party bank in their version is as follows.
The complainant is not a consumer under the C P Act as the alleged transaction is a commercial transaction and hence not maintainable before the forum.
The complainant had presented a cheque which was sent for collection to Puthur Panchayat Agriculture and Non- Agriculture Labourers Co-operative Society Ltd. They have not returned the cheque after collection. The opposite party has sent the cheque for collection without any delay or negligence to Puthur Panchayat Agriculture and Non- Agriculture Labourers Co-Operative Society Ltd. which has been received by them. Since the opposite party has not received any intimation, they are not in a position to state anything about the fate of the cheque and Puthur Panchayat Agriculture and Non- Agriculture Labourers Co-Operative Society Ltd is a necessary party to the complaint. The other allegations in the complaint regarding the non intimation about the cheque and Deficiency in service/ dereliction of duty are denied. There is no Deficiency in service on their part and the complaint has to be dismissed.
- From the pleadings of both parties, the following points arise for consideration.
1) Whether the complainant is a consumer under the C P Act and whether the alleged
transaction is commercial?
2) Whether the complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties?
3) Whether there is any Deficiency in service/Unfair Trade practice on the part of opposite
party?
4) Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
5) Reliefs, if any as cost & compensation.
- Complainant filed chief affidavit in evidence and Ext A1 to A4 were marked from his side. The opposite party also filed proof affidavit and Ext B1 & B2 marked in evidence. Both parties filed notes of argument.
- Point No.1
Whether the complainant is a ‘Consumer’ under the Consumer Protection Act and whether the transaction is ‘Commercial’?
As per the complaint, the complainant is the Director of the company namely ‘Ramble Hire Purchase Pvt Ltd’ which has corporate office at Mannuthy, Thrissur and branch office at Palakkad.
The complainant’s contention is that he had maintained an account with No.006307300000613 in the Palakkad main branch of the opposite party and is a regular customer of the opposite party. He presented a cheque on 05.11.2018 for Rs.65,000/-bearing cheque no.013840 drawn on Puthur Panchayat Agriculture and Non- Agriculture Labourers Co-operative Society Ltd for collection through his account maintained with the opposite party. But the cheque was not collected or returned. The bank did not provide any intimation regarding the cheque even after repeated requests and there is Deficiency in service on their part.
7. On perusal of Ext A1, PAY-IN-SLIP issued by opposite party South Indian Bank, it can be seen that the name of the Account holder is Ramble Hire Purchase. Ext A2 confirms the fact the account maintained with the opposite party bank is current account no. 006307300000613 in the name of the company. So the transaction in this case is through the account of the company maintained for business purpose. The transaction is aimed at generating profits for the company and the availing of service of the opposite party is connected with business activities. Hence the opposite party’s contention that the transaction is commercial appears to be correct.
Since the transaction is for enhancing the profits of the company, we are of the opinion that it is for commercial purpose as envisaged under Consumer Protection Act 1986 (the complaint is filed under the old Act). So the complainant cannot be termed as ‘Consumer’ under the Consumer Protection Act.
So the complaint is not maintainable before the Commission and hence it is dismissed.
Pronounced in open court on this the 14th day of October, 2022.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya.A
Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty N.K.
Member
APPENDIX
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant
Ext.A1 – Deposit /Pay in slip dated 05.11.2018 issued by OP.
Ext.A2 – Copy of letter sent by the complainant to the OP dated 06.02.2019
Ext.A3 – Copy of Lawyer Notice with postal receipt dated 26.09.2019.
Ext.A4 – Power of Attorney dated 17.08.2016.
Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party
Ext.B1 – Copy of letter issued by the OP to Puthur Panchayat Agriculture and Non- Agriculture
Labourers Co-Operative Society Ltd dated 27.02.2020.
Ext.B2 – Copy of letter issued by Puthur Panchayat Agriculture and Non- Agriculture
Labourers Co-Operative Society Ltd to the OP Bank dated 29.02.2020 .
Witness examined on the side of the complainant :Nil
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party :NIL
Cost : NIL
