M. THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The appellant, as complainant approached the District Forum, for the recovery of a sum of Rs.1,06,231/-, in addition to Rs.50000/- as compensation, for mental agony, on the ground with among other grounds, that there was a settlement between the parties for payment of Rs.1,06,231/-, as per the settlement dt.13.02.2004, and despite repeated request and notice, they have failed to pay the same, which should be construed as deficiency in service, as well the complainant should be construed as consumer.
(2.) The District Forum, felt that the complaint may not be maintainable, heard about the maintainability of the case, without ordering notice to the opposite parties. After hearing the complainant, and scanning the definition for consumer, as well service, the District Forum felt that the settlement between the parties and the agreement to pay a specific amount, will not come within the meaning of service, and if at all for the agreed amount, if not paid, it is open to the complainant to approach the Civil court for recovery of the money. Thus coming to a conclusion, the complaint was rejected on 30.7.2009, against which the appeal has been filed before this Commission.
(3.) The Registry, after perusing the appeal grounds, felt the same is not maintainable, and placed before us for maintainability.;