Thiru Justice S.A. Kader, President.—The appeal arises out of the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pudukottai, dated 2.12.93 in O.P. No. 23/93. The Opposite Parties are the Appellants.

2. One Gopalakrishnan has issued a telegram to one Kasi and there has been delay in delivery. The complaint has been filed not by the said Gopalakrishnan, but by the Secretary of the Aranthangy Circle Consumer Redressal Forum registered under the Registration No. 144/92. The District Forum has allowed the complaint and ordered the Opposite Parties to pay compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,250/-. Hence this appeal.

3. The preliminary objection is raised by the learned Counsel for the Appellants that the complaint by the Secretary of the Consumer Association is not maintainable without impleading the actual consumer concerned in the matter. We have repeatedly held that when Consumer Association filed a complaint on behalf of a particular consumer, that particular consumer must be brought to record. The failure to bring on record the actual consumer is fatal to this complaint. It is also pointed out by the learned Counsel for the Appellants that the Proof Affidavit in this case is filed by the Secretary of the Consumer Association and not by the person concerned. This is something strange and it is not open to the District Forum to act upon the Proof Affidavit of the person, who does not know the fact. The order of the District Forum cannot stand and has to be set aside. The matter has to be remitted back to the District Forum.

4. In the result, the appeal is allowed, the order of the District Forum is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the District Forum with the direction to implead the actual consumer as a party and dispose of the matter on merits. No costs.

Appeal allowed.