Date of filing: | 15.06.2016 |
Date of disposal: | 05.08.2023 |
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED: 05.08.2023
PRESENT
Mr.K.B SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs. DIVYASHREE M : LADY MEMBER
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 145/2016
Sri. A.N. Ganesh, M/s. Nisarga Coconut Industries, Proprietary Concern, Sy. No.74/1, Guddettu Temple Road, Yadadi Mathyadi Post & Village, Kundapura Taluk, Udupi District-576222. Karnataka. (Advocate – Sri.C.Sadashiva) | …..Complainant/s. |
V/s |
1) M/s. Marshall Fowler Engineers India (P) Ltd., A Company corporate under the companies Act 1956, Registered Office at S.F.No.69/1, A.V.G. Layout, Bhavani Mill, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Post State Coimbatore – 841021, Tamilnadu, Rep. by its Managing Director. (Advocate – Sri.Stanley Valwin Salins) 2) The Manager, Marketing and Sales, M/s. Marshall Fowler Engineers India (P) Ltd., Registered Office at S.F. No.69/1, ABG Layout, SIDCO Industrial Estate, State Coimbatore-841021 Post, Tamilnadu. (Advocate – Sri.Abhinav.R) | …..Opposite party/s. |
ORDER
BY SRI.K.B SANGANNANAVAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
01. This is a complaint filed by the complainant on 15.06.2016 with a prayer to direct respondents to pay a sum of Rs.96,62,031/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the complaint till realization.
02. Opposite party No.1 & 2 have contested the complaint through learned counsel, filed their version and the Commission has to hold an enquiry of the complaint on alleged rendering service on the part of opposite party No.1 & 2.
03. However in the mean time on 15.11.2017 an I.A. under section 10 of CPC 1908 R/w section 13(4)(vi) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 R/w section 151 of CPC, 1908 filed to stay all further proceedings of this complaint in view of pendency of O.S. No.62/2016 filed by the opposite parties against complainant before District Court at Coimbatore. This I.A. is still pending for consideration and in the meantime complainant remained absent and in his interest and in the interest of justice court notice is ordered came to be served, still failed to participate in this complaint. In such circumstances learned counsel for opposite party submits that, he has lost his interest since Court of III Additional District Court, Coimbatore in O.S. No.62/2016 passed a decree in favour of opposite party on 07.06.2023. We examined copy of the said judgment wherein the suit filed by the opposite parties herein is decreed with cost and directed defendant/complainant herein to pay Rs.9,51,546/- along with interest at 12% per annum from 01.01.2013 till the date of decree, thereafter at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization along with costs. Learned counsel further submits that, consumer complaint is filed on 15.06.2016 is subsequent to filing of O.S. No.62/2016 and to find separate case details objected from Principal District Court, Coimbatore, is furnished wherein it would be seen the suit was filed on 16.02.2016 by Marshal Flower Engineers India Private Limited and the said suit came to be decreed on 07.06.2023. In such circumstances learned counsel rightly submitted that, principles of res judicata come in to play and to find separate placed reliance reported in 2017 SCC Online Calcutta 2177 decided by the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta the case between M/s. Kesoram Industries Limited Vs. Allahabad Bank, wherein para-30 “In my opinion, principle of law relating to res judicata is based on the need of giving finality of judicial decisions. It means issue decided cannot be adjudicated again. Primarily it applies between the past litigation and future litigation. If the decisions of said forums even not considered to be one in the nature of the suit, they are the pronouncement by a judicial forum and decisions thereof in a proceeding which reaches the finality”. Para-31 “On being unsuccessful the plaintiff has filed the suit long after the cause of action arose in the year 2000. The principles also apply to quasi-judicial proceeding of the tribunals whether civil or otherwise. It may be that all the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code may not be applicable to Consumer Forums, principle laid down in Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure could be applicable.” It is therefore in our view the complainant could have lost his interest to prosecute the consumer complaint before this Commission. Hence we proceed to dismiss the complaint for his default and also for the reasons recorded with no order as to costs.
04. Provide copy of this order to the parties.
LADY MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Knmp*
