SHIVA KANT UPADHYAYA Vs. RAMA SHANKAR UPADHYAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case was called out several times. The respondent was represented by Mr. Bramha Deen. Looking into the circumstances of the case, we deem it proper to dispose of the appeal on merit. The only question which has been raised while impugning the impugned judgment and order challenged in this appeal that the complaint on the face of it was not maintainable as it was not a case of consumer dispute. In the instant case Plot No. 786/87 was given for extracting soil upto 3 1/2' depth by the complainant to the appellant for a period of two years and in lieu thereof the appellant was supposed to hand over 1,20,000 bricks and ashes thereof for the use of the complainant. It was further averred in the complaint that after supplying 83,750 bricks remaining bricks were not given causing loss to the tune of Rs. 40,000. Even on the face of it the allegations of the complainant are accepted, it is merely a case of breach of contract and alleged consequent loss of Rs. 40,000, that only brings out a case of Civil Suit, if any, for the enforcement of the contract and aforesaid compensation on account of damage being caused and this will obviously require a detailed examination of evidence. In fact there was an agreement in which the part performance was done by the appellant but as to whether the loss was actually occasioned for a tune of Rs. 40,000 or as to whether such agreement is a valid agreement in the eye of law is the subject matter of requiring detail examination of evidence. All these cases are not the subject matter of District Forum, hence the District Forum had travelled beyond its scope and partly allowed the complaint. We are not satisfied with the impugned judgment and order and it does not survive in law. The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of the District Forum are set aside. Parties will bear their own costs. Appeal allowed.