West Bengal

Birbhum

CC/57/2017

Debashis Ghosh, S/O Lt Kanailal Ghosh - Complainant(s)

Versus

GM, Suri Telecom District - Opp.Party(s)

Asif Iqbal

25 Jul 2017

ORDER

The complainant files hazira through Ld. Advocate. Today is fixed for admission hearing. Heard Ld. Advocate for the complainant. Perused the documents on record.

            Late Kanailal Ghosh, father of the complainant was an employee under the O.Ps. He had submitted medical bills to the O.Ps during his life time. The bill was related to his wife, a cancer patient. The O.Ps did not reimburse the amount of above mentioned medical bills. Therefore, the complainant has come to the Forum for proper relief.

The Forum finds that neither Kanailal Ghosh nor his son, the complainant is a consumer under the O.Ps. According to Sec.2(d)(ii) ‘Consumer’ means any person who hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised or under any system of deferred payment when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purpose.

Late Kanailal Ghosh or his beneficiary Debasis Ghosh does not hires or avails any services for a consideration. Late Kanailal Ghosh was an employee and the O.Ps were employer. The employer is not a service provider and there is no existence of consideration on the part of the employee. The complainant or his father is not a consumer under the O.Ps.

Hence, the case is inadmissible.