2. Petitioner's case is that during his stay in Saudi Arabia, he purchased a truck to the respondent, his brother in law who in turn promised to pay Rs.40,000/- P.M. To petitioner's family which he did not pay; not only this, respondent also abandoned the truck in front of petitioner's house and did not turn up to give accounts. Hence, this petition for recovery of suit amount including compensation / damages and arrears of earning for a period of seven months etc.
3. Respondent did not appear to contest the petition despite issuance of court process including publication of notice in the press, he was, therefore, proceeded ex parte.
4. Petitioner appeared as PW/1 and also placed on record documentary evidence to support his claim.
5. No doubt, petitioner's evidence has not been rebutted by the respondent by reason of ex parte proceedings yet, his claim is liable to be dismissed simply for the reason that relationship of "consumer" and "service provider" is not made out in this case; parties have in fact a dispute of civil nature for which the petitioner should approach the civil court either with a claim for recovery of suit amount or specific performance of impugned agreement; the petitioner appears to have approached this court perhaps in a bid to avoid payment of court fee. Therefore, petitioner's claim, in the given circumstances, cannot be decreed.
6 For what has been stated above, plaint is returned for presentation to a court of competent jurisdiction, if advised so. After completion, file be consigned to record room.