AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS is an appeal against the order dated 21.7.1997 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sangrur (hereinafter called the District Forum). Vide its order, the District Forum directed the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 1,43,833/- to the complainant.
THE complaint was filed by one Kewal Singh, who in the heading of the complaint has been described as under : "Kewal Singh s/o Balbir Singh Green Carriers and Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd., Milkh Bazar, Malerkotla, District Sangrur (Punjab) - complainant."
Before the beginning of the typed portion, it is written Kewal Singh son of Balbir Singh.
A legal objection was taken in the reply filed by the opposite parties before the District Forum that the complainant had got no cause of action to file the complaint nor he had got any locus standi to file the complaint on behalf of M/s. Green Carriers & Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd., Milkh Bazar, Malerkotla, District Sangrur.
WE need not go into the merits of the case as according to us this appeal shall succeed on account of the legal objection taken by the opposite party before the District Forum. Admittedly neither it is written in the complaint or it comes out from the record as to how Kewal Singh is authorised to file the complaint on behalf of M/s. Green Carriers and Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd., Milkh Bazar, Malerkotla, District Sangrur (Punjab). It is not even mentioned in the heading of the complaint that M/s. Green Carriers and Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd., are filing their complaint through Kewal Singh, who is anyway associated with them. No authorization or any other such certificate has been placed on the record, which could show that Kewal Singh was competent to file the complaint on behalf of Green Carriers and Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. In view of this factual position, the District Forum should have dismissed the complaint as not filed by a competent person. The District Forum has not properly discussed this point in its order. The District Forum was satisfied about the competency of Kewal Singh for filing the complaint merely by observing as under : "We are also of the view that through A-43 the complainant had established that Kewal Singh, complainant is the agent of the Green Carriers. In our view that it is sufficient that the complaint is properly drafted by mentioning the name of Kewal Singh."
It will be advisable to reproduce A-43, which reads as under : " (TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN) This is certified that Mr. Kewal Singh, Agent of our Malerkotla Agency and working since 1.4.1991 and he has full authority for doing any work on behalf of M/s. Green Carries & Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. And he has full responsibility about any activity of our Malerkotla agency. For Green Carries & Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. Sd/- Sd/- (Authorised Signatory) (Agent''s Sign)"
ABOVE said certificate does not authorise Kewal Singh to file the complaint on behalf of M/s. Green Carriers & Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. It is further pertinent to note here that even this certificate has been issued on 7.6.1997. But the complaint was instituted on 21.1.1996. From the above said factual position, it is, thus, clear that Kewal Singh had locus standi to file the complaint on behalf of M/s. Green Carriers & Contractors (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. Resultantly order dated 21.7.1997 of the District Forum is set aside and the appeal is allowed with costs, which are quantified as Rs. 1,000/-. Before parting with our order, we may mention here that the real complainant, if so advised, can file his complaint before the proper authourity in accordance with law, Appeal allowed. Appeal allowed.