ARUN KHANNA Vs. R S JINDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainants have come up in appeal against the order dated 26th February, 1997 passed by learned District Forum, Panipat, whereby their complaint has been dismissed by holding that the complainants were not covered within the definition of the expression "consumer" under the Consumer Protection Act.

(2.) According to Mr. G. K. Khanna, authorised representative of the appellants, the complaint was filed against the Advocates alleging deficiency in their professional service. It is further alleged, that by adopting unfair and deceptive trade practices the system of dispensation of justice had been ridiculed, which de served stern action to be taken, by directing the Advocates to desist from appearing against the firm M/s. Taxcardco and should also be directed to reimburse the amount alleged to have been misappropriated with interest etc. After hearing the authorised agent of the appellants we do not find any legal infirmity in the order passed by the learned District Forum, whereby his complaint has been dismissed as from the nature of allegations levelled against the Advocates, deficiency of professional service has not been established. In fact from the perusal of records it is evident that the complainants had already filed applications for initiating enquiry and prosecution of the Advocates concerned for having appeared in the cases, for attesting the affidavits etc, which according to the complainants amounted to com mission of offences under Sections 193/196/ 197/198/200/465/471/500/501/511/109/114/ 137/138 of the Indian Penal Code. In view of the aforesaid factual and legal position, we do not find any congent and convincing material to hold that the complainants had any grievance redressable under the consumer jurisdiction. If grievance was based on some fraud having been committed by any particular Advocate or any person on their behalf, the remedy was to approach the Civil or Criminal Court, instead of invoking the consumer jurisdiction. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed and the order passed by the learned District Forum is upheld.