RAM PARKASH Vs. SARWAN MAL DES RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of present revision petition, there is challenge to order dated 22.12.2011, passed by Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (for short, 'State Commission') in Revision Petition No. 950 of 2009.

(2.) BRIEF facts are that petitioner had deposited Rs.20,000/ -, Rs.15,000/ - and Rs.10,000/ - through cheques No.429989, 958119 and 958121 dated 26.11.1997, 30.1.1999 and 4.3.1999, respectively with the respondent/o.p.'s firm on its allurement and assurance to earn interest @ 12% per annum. The said cheques were debited to petitioner and his wife's joint account no.24804 with State Bank of Patiala, Main Branch, Mansa. Respondent had paid interest to him on 31st March of every year. Respondent supplied the statement of account to the petitioner showing the balance of Rs.1,23,729/ - payable to him on 31.3.2008, but of no use. Petitioner requested many time to the respondent to release the payment of Rs.78,797/ - on account of interest payable upto 31.3.2008 on his deposit of Rs.45,000/ - but respondent only made assurances to make the payment. Legal notice dated 17.9.2008 was served which was received by the respondent on 19.9.2008. Thereafter, petitioner filed a complaint on the ground of deficiency in service and prayed that respondent be directed to pay Rs.45,000/ - as principle sum, Rs.94,000/ - as interest with further interest from 21.4.2009 till the date of payment.

(3.) THE respondent filed an application dated 4.6.2009 before the District Forum for dismissal of the complaint on the ground that petitioner who had sought recovery of the amount of loan advanced to him and for payment of interest is not maintainable, as petitioner neither falls within the definition of "Consumer" nor any "service" was taken from the respondent. The complaint was not maintainable before the District Forum as the same was also barred by limitation.