At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI
By, MR. Y. KRISHAN & MR. JUSTICE B.S. YADAV
For the Complainant: Mr. Joseph Vellapally, Sr. Adv. & Mr. V. Balachandran, Advocate. For the Opp. Party: in person.
Mr. Justice V. Balakrishna Eradi, President?
After hearing both sides we consider that there is merit in the contention put forward by the appellant that the State Commission has failed in its duty to advert to the question as to whether the complainant who claimed relief before it could be regarded as a consumer or not. From the facts appearing on record it is manifest that the complainant is carrying on the business of manufacture of machine parts on a large scale for the purpose of earning profit and significantly one single item of machinery in respect of which the complaint petition was filed by him before the State Commission itself is of the value of Rs. 21 lakhs and odd. In the circumstances, we fail to see how the conclusion can be escaped that the machinery in question which is alleged to be defective was purchased for a commercial purpose. Hence, the complainant is not entitled to be regarded as a consumer and the complaint petition filed by him was not maintainable before the State Commission. The order passed by the State Commission is set aside the complaint petition is dismissed. The parties will bear their respective costs. It is made clear that the dismissal of this complaint as per this order w
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
ill not in any manner operate to the prejudice of the complainant in the matter of his pursuing his remedies by way of ordinary civil suit.