(1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 30.7.2008, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raigarh (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short) in complaint case No. 90/07, whereby the appellant herein as well as respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were held jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs. 30,000 on account of loss of motorcycle from cycle stand and also to pay Rs. 1,000. as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 500 as cost of litigation, to the complaint, within a period of one month from the date of order, otherwise the amount has been made payable along with interest @12% p.a.
(2.) FACTS of the case are that the complainant Shyam Kumar Baind, respondent No. 1 before us, went to cinema hall for viewing a picture. Cycle stand was being run in the cinema hall. He parked his motorcycle in the cycle stand. Paid Rs. 5 as charges of the stand and went inside the cinema hall for viewing picture along with his friend. When he came back, then it was found that the motorcycle was stolen. Appellant herein was the owner of cinema hall and the stand was run by respondent No. 2, Dhaniram. Respondent No. 2 is father of the appellant herein and is also owner of talkies, along with the appellant. When even after complaint, no compensation was paid, then complaint was filed before the District Forum.
(3.) RESPONDENT Nos. 2 and 3 remained absent during the proceedings before District Forum. Only appellant herein appeared and filed reply before the District Forum and averred that the receipt which was filed by the complainant was a forged document. It was also pleaded that the complainant was not owner of the motorcycle and thus was not a 'consumer' and so was not entitled to get any compensation. It has also been averred that respondent No. 3, Dhaniram was the person who was running the cycle stand, on contract, at Gopi Talkies premises for a period from 10.7.2007 to 10.6.2008 and as per the agreement only Dhaniram was responsible for any loss or theft of the vehicle from the cycle stand.