AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE appellant is the original complainant who appears to have taken a shed on hire purchase basis. It also appears that there is some dispute between the G.I.D.C.-the opposite party and the Municipality and, therefore, the Municipality issued a distress warrant against the appellant-complainant not to pay the amount to G.I.D.C. So far, the amount has not been paid to the G.I.D.C. regarding hire purchase agreement and the G.I.D.C. is not issuing no due certificate. It appears to us that this is a private dispute amongst the parties. Municipality is not one of the parties before us. This is a matter which can be effectively tried by the Civil Court when all the three concerned parties are before Civil Court. We do not find any error committed by the District Forum. However, whatever observations made by the District Forum will not be binding to any of the parties since the decision is without jurisdiction. This is not a consumer dispute and the dispute being a private dispute it can be settled by Civil Court only. THErefore there is no merit in the appeal and the appeal is dismissed. ORDER
THE appeal is dismissed. In the circumstances there will be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.