Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

A/08/2461

SANTOSH KU. BANPURIYA - Complainant(s)

Versus

TATA MOTORS PVT. LTD. AND ONE ANOTHER - Opp.Party(s)

SH. RAFIQ KHAN

03 Jan 2020

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

 

                                    FIRST APPEAL NO. 2461 OF 2008

(Arising out of order dated 18.08.2008 passed in C.C.No.62/2007 by District Forum, Bhopal)

 

SANTOSH KUMAR BANPURIYA.                                                                      …          APPELLANT

 

Versus

                 

MANAGER, TATA MOTORS PVT.LTD & ANR.                                                  …         RESPONDENTS                                      

 

BEFORE:

 

                  HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU S. KEMKAR     :      PRESIDENT

                  HON’BLE DR. MRS MONIKA MALIK                             :      MEMBER  

                  HON’BLE SHRI S. S. BANSAL                                       :      MEMBER                                  

 

                                      O R D E R

03.01.2020

 

          None for the appellant.

            Shri Lalit Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.

            Shri J. S. Parmar, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

                       

As per Shri Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar :                       

            This appeal is directed against the order dated 18.08.2008 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhopal (for short ‘Forum’) in C.C.No.62/2007 whereby the Forum has dismissed the complaint filed by the appellant holding that the dispute raised by the complainant/appellant will not fall within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short ‘Act’) as complainant is not covered under the definition of ‘consumer’.

2.                     We have gone through the pleadings and documents as also the relief claimed in the complaint.  On going through the same it is revealed that the complainant/appellant had purchased a Tata Spacio vehicle bearing registration no. MP-04 T-8250 from respondent no.1 by getting it financed from respondent no.2. It was repossessed by the financer respondent no.2 in view of alleged defaults in payment of instalments.  Alleging unauthorized and illegal re-possession of vehicle for non-payment of instalments thereby alleging deficiency in service on part of the financer, the complainant/appellant filed a complaint before the Forum. The opposite parties/respondents remained ex-parte before the Forum.  The Forum has dismissed the complaint as aforesaid.

3.                     Having regard to the aforesaid pleadings, we are of a considered view that the Forum has committed error in holding that the complainant/appellant is not a consumer and the dispute raised will not fall within the purview of the Act.  Taking note of the pleadings

 

-2-

and the relief claimed it is certainly a consumer dispute.  In the circumstances, we remand the case to the District Forum for deciding it afresh on merits in accordance with law.  The documents filed by the appellant with the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC be sent to the Forum after retaining copy of the same, along with the record.

4.                     Parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 19.02.2020.

5.                     The respondents/opposite parties shall file reply within one month from the date of appearance.  If it is filed within one month it will be taken on record. Thereafter the Forum shall proceed in the matter in accordance with law.

6.                     With the aforesaid directions, the appeal is disposed of. 

 

    (Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar)    (Dr. Monika Malik)    (S. S. Bansal) 

                 President                                Member                 Member