AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. R. K. Bhawnani, learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
The District Forum allowed the Complaint but the same has been reversed by the State Commission keeping in view the fact that the nature of the claim was in the shape of a recovery of money and therefore the State Commission opined that this would be subject to regular proceedings in a Civil Suit where evidence would be required for being gleaned, shifted and scrutinized as even otherwise the Complainant did not fall within the definition of the word ‘Consumer’ as contained under Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
We have gone through the pleadings as well as the findings recorded by the State Commission and we find that in view of the nature of the transaction for which the unfairness was being alleged was a pure money recovery dispute and therefore the State Commission was justified in declining to entertain the Complaint and accordingly went out to set aside the Order of the District Commission and dismissed the Complaint. We agree with the conclusions drawn by the State Commission. The remedy for the Petitioner was to file a Civil Suit and instead he filed a Complaint that came to be allowed on 18.08.2023 by the District Commission, Raigarh. Since the said order has been set aside on the grounds of the non-availability of the Forum to the Complainant, it will be open to the Complainant to approach the appropriate Civil Court for redressal.
Consigned to records with the above observations. Application also stands disposed of.