IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.
Present: 1.Shri Jiban ballav Das , President
2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,
3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.
Dated the 20th day of December,2019.
C.C.Case No. 40 of 2018.
Sri Gopinath Padhi , S/O Late Baidhar Padhi
Vill. Dhanapur,P.O. Dhaneswar,
P.S.Korei,
Dist.- Jajpur . …… ……....Complainant . .
(Versus)
- Authorised officer,Designated as M.D ,odisha State Seeds Co.Ltd
Santarapur, Bhubaneswar .
- Naba Kishore Sethi,S/O Bichhanda Sethi Seed production officer
At.P.S.S.C,Ltd, Canal Road,Ranihat,Cuttack.
……………..Opp.Parties.
For the Complainant: Sri P.K.Ray, Advocate .
For the Opp.Parties : Sri A.Mishra, Sri S.I.Mishra,Advocates.
Date of order: 20 . 12. 2019.
SHRI JIBAN BALLAV DAS , P R E S I D E N T .
The petitioner has filed the above dispute against the O.Ps alleging deficiency in service as well as illegal trade practice due to non-payment of the house rent amounting to Rs. 2,01,000/-.
The facts as stated by the petitioner in the complaint petition shortly are that the petitioner has a premises at Vill. Dhanapur which was taken by O.Ps to open a go down. Accordingly on the strength of agreement executed on 01.03.2016 in between the petitioner and O.p.no.2 for the premises having 5000 Sq.ft. which was taken by the O.ps from 01.03.2016 to 30.09.2016 for godown purpose. According to petitioner the monthly rent for the premises was fixed at Rs.55000 and as against such monthly rent the petitioner has received only Rs.1,84,000/- and there a sum of Rs. 2,01,000/- outstanding against the O.Ps. Due to such outstanding amount of rent the petitioner though approached the O.ps to clear up the amount , the O.Ps without paying any heed to the request of the petitioner remained silent . The petitioner served a legal notice on 16.03.2018 but to no result. Accordingly finding no other way the petitioner has filed the present dispute to direct the O.Ps to pay Rs.2,01,000/- towards outstanding rent amount as well as Rs.50,000/- as compensation .
After appearance the O.Ps have filed the written version .In the written version the O.Ps have taken the following plea:
The present dispute is not maintainable in the Hon’ble Forum since the petitioner is not a consumer as per C.P.Act 1986.
Further it is stated by the O.ps that the O.P .no.2 having the requirement 5000 sq.ft area with the petitioner and took the premises for godown purpose on time @ Rs11.00) only for sq.ft per month with effect from 01.03.2016 to 30.06.2016.After expiry of the contact period as per agreement on a request made by the O.Ps the godown space was allowed up to 30.09.2016 and subsequently the godown was vacated on 01.10.2016 by the O.P .According to O.Ps the rent which was fixed for the premises of the petitioner is subject to fair rent calculation. Accordingly the M.D OSSC Ltd issued letter 23.07.2018 to the Executive Engineer R & B ,Jajpur Road to enable him to take necessary steps for fair calculation of rent of the said building .In such situation the O.ps have paid Rs.1,84,000/- to the petitioner towards the monthly rent subject to adjustment at the time of final settlement of rent after receipt of fair rent certificate but without disclosing the real facts the petitioner is claiming Rs11.00 per sq.ft per month as per agreement . It is also the fact that after measurement the sq.ft has reduced from 5000 to 4496 sq.ft which was not disclosed by the petitioner at the time of execution of the agreement . As such further claim of Rs.2,1,000/- towards the rent by the petitioner is denied by the O.ps in absence of fair rent certificate for which the legal notice which was served on the O.P on 16.03.2018 is baseless. In addition to it as per clause -21 of the agreement the petitioner is required to approach the Arbitrator for his grievance without approaching the Hon’ble Forum .In view of the above narrated clarification the dispute is liable to be dismissed .
On the date of hearing we heard the argument from both the sides and perused the record in details. After perusal of the record we are inclined to decide the dispute in case the petitioner satisfy that he is a consumer as per section 2(d)(II) of C.P.Act-1986 who has hired the service of O.Ps on payment of consideration in view of the observation of Hon’ble Supreme court in 1997(2)-CLT-271,Supreme court –para-19 ( New India Assurance Co. Versus Sri B.N.Sinani) .In case the petitioner will prove that he is a consumer then we will proceed to next aspect . In the present case there is not an iota of evidence from the side of the petitioner to establish that he has hired the services of O.Ps by paying consideration .Accordingly though the dispute is liable to be dismissed against the O.Ps but without dismissing the dispute we dispose of the dispute since the petitioner has filed the present dispute basing on breach of agreement .
O R D E R
The dispute is disposed of. The O.ps are directed to finalize the payment of rent taking into consideration the official procedure and term and condition of the agreement with consultation of the petitioner .Such direction though will not give any opportunity to the petitioner to initiate proceeding U/S 25 and 27 of C.P.Act 1986 . On the other hand the petitioner is at liberty to take shelter in other Forum in respect of his grievance and in case the petitioner approach other Forum the time spent for this dispute will not come on the way of limitation. No cost.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 20th day of December,2019. under my hand and seal of the Forum.
