BHIKAAJI NANAJI THAKORE vs SUPREME SALES CORPORATION

BEING aggrieved by the judgment of the District Forum, Mehsana in complaint No. 160/92 passed on 4.9.92, the original complainants have filed this appeal.

FROM the partnership deed dated 21.6.89 it appears that the present complainant with Shri Karsanji Kuraji Thakore had formed a partnership in the name of Shakti Tubewell Company. The object of this partnership was to cultivate the land bearing Survey Number 2319 in which a tubewell was made by the partnership and for the purpose of drawing water Karsanji who was the principal partner appears to have purchased the motor pump from Supreme Sales Corporation the present respondent (original opponent). It appears that the partnership was dissolved on December 9, 91 and the appellant-claimant is claiming that the electricity connection as well as the motor pump has come to his share. Unfortunately, neither party has filed any affidavit. The complaint has been filed on a printed form which is very insufficient. It would have been better if the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the complainant had applied his mind and assisted the Court by filing an affidavit. It also appears to us that the opposite party has sold the motor pump to Shri Karsanji Kuraji. He has also written a letter demanding some amount not paid to the opposite party. Considering the pre-amble and object of the Consumer Protection Act, we are of the opinion that the complainant ought to have been given proper information and opportunity to put his case properly. In this Court Karsanji has filed an affidavit in which he has stated that this motor pump was in the ownership of the partnership and on dissolution, this property of motor pump has gone to the share of the present appellant.

We are constrained to say that it would have been much better if the complainant has stated all these facts before the District Forum. However, we feel that on account of ignorance and poverty, the person was not able to plead the case very properly and has not filed even an affidavit which to our opinion has resulted into the failure of justice. In order to give one more opportunity to the complainant and in view of the affidavit filed before us, we are of the opinion that the case should be remanded, as a special case, to the District Forum.

THE appeal is, therefore, allowed. THE order of the District Forum is set aside and the case is remanded to the District Forum to decide it afresh after giving opportunity to both the parties and permitting the complainant to add Karsanji Kuraji as one of the complainants so that justice may be done. THE copy of the affidavit may be sent to the District Forum with remand order. ORDER THE appeal is allowed. THE order of the District Forum is set aside. THE case is remanded to the District Forum to decide it afresh after giving opportunity to both the parties to adduce evidence. THE cost will be the cost in the cause. Appeal allowed.