DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)

Consumer Complaint No.984 of 2019

                                                Date of institution:  18.06.2019                                              Date of decision   :  25.10.2021

Dipendra Singh Malka, Advocate # 483, Sector 127, Shivalik City, Kharar –Landran Highway, Greater Mohali, 140307.

…….Complainant

Versus

Registrar Cooperative Societies, Punjab, Verka Milk Plant, SAS Nagar, Punjab.

                                                      ……..Opposite Party

Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.

Quorum:   Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.

                Ms. Gagandeep Gosal,  Member

Present:    None for the complainant.

                None for the OP.

Order dictated by :-  Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.

Order

               The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred as ‘OP’ for short), on the ground that the CC is an Advocate practicing in the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court.  The CC has further averred that he demanded certified copies from the OP by paying a fee of Rs.100/- through postal order No 53H 451330.  The CC had demanded certified copy of  letter No.6028 dated 11.08.2005, regarding attachment of House No.1018, Phase 3B2, Mohali  and certified copy of NOC regarding House No.1018 Phase 3B2, Mohali.  It is averred that the representative of the CC visited number of times in the office of the OP, but every time his request fell on deaf ears and he was not given certified copies.  Even the CC had spent huge sum on every visit to the office of the OP.  

                Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the CC has sought compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- for harassment and mental agony and litigation expenses. Complaint of the CC is supported by affidavit of the CC.

2.             In reply the OP has raised number of preliminary objections challenging the veracity of the complaint and also denied all the averments of the complaint. It is further averred that the complaint is liable to be dismissed on the ground of mis-joinder of parties.

3.             The CC in support of his complaint submitted his affidavit and documents Ex.C-1 to C-6. On the other hand no evidence has been led by the OP.

4.             It is pertinent to mention here that on 29.08.2019 Ms. Jashanvir Kaur, Inspector Coop. Societies had appeared on behalf of the OP and filed reply, but after that none appeared on behalf of the OP till today. Today the case is fixed for arguments, but neither the complainant nor the OP have appeared. We ourselves have gone through the record and are going to decide the complaint on merits.

5.             The point in controversy before us is whether the CC falls within the purview of Consumer or not. As far as the OP is concerned, admittedly the OP had accepted the consideration amount to the tune of Rs.100/- in the shape of a postal order. It is also settled principle of law that any person who pays money or price for any goods or services is covered under the definition of ‘consumer’.

6.             From the perusal of the reply filed by the OP, it is not made clear that how the complaint is bad for misjoinder and non joinder of necessary parties. Since the OP has received a sum of Rs.100/- for supply of certified copies as desired by the CC and mentioned in the complaint, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the CC was entitled for certified copies from the OP pertaining to House No.1015 Phase 3B2, Mohali as he has deposited fee for obtaining such copies. As such the complainant has been able to prove deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

7.             We feel, that the Consumer Protection Act is a benevolent legislature enacted to help the poor consumers and is enacted for the redressal of their grievances. There is no reason mentioned in the version of the OP, that why certified copies were not supplied to the CC. We are also equipped with the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in Shri Prabhakar Vyanbkoda Aadone Versus Superintendent Civil Court bearing revision petition No.2135 of 2020.

8.             In view of our above discussion, the present complaint is allowed. The OP is ordered to pay a lump sum amount to the tune of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only) to the CC towards compensation for harassment, mental agony and litigation cost,  within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.   Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties.   File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Announced

October 25, 2021

                                                                (Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)

                                                                President

                                                       I agree.

(Ms. Gagandeep Gosal)

Member