Order no.6 Dated 27.01.2023
Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present.
Ld. Advocate for the opposite parties files questionnaire. Copy served.
Today is fixed for also hearing on the maintainability point of the case.
Perused and considered the complaint application. Heard both side.
On perusal of the complaint application we find that ‘Sai Baba Enterprise’ is the complainant in this case and represented through its proprietor Sri Subrata Sarkar.
The brief fact is that the complainant is a garment maker and for the purpose of manufacturing garments buys Semi Combed Spring from the opposite parties. The complainant in August, 2020 placed an order to purchase 655.2 kgs of 40s semi combed silver spring strings from opposite party no. 1 a sum of Rs. 1,26,315/- only on 31.08.2020. Though on 05.09.2020 the opposite party no. 1 served invoice dated 05.09.2020 for sum of Rs.1,26,315/- but till date has not delivered the goods in favour of the complainant. Therefore, the opposite parties are liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
It is apparent on the face of the complaint application that the complainant runs a business of garment manufacturing for which he made alleged purchase of 655.2 kgs of 40s semi combed silver spring strings from opposite party no. 1 for sum of Rs.1,26,315/-. Nowhere in the complaint application it has been mentioned that the proprietor of the complainant runs the said business on self employment for his livelihood. Moreover, the said 40s semi combed silver spring strings is required for the purpose of manufacture of garments which are the saleable products of the complainant in market of the complainant’s business.
Therefore, we are of the opinion that the alleged transaction between the parties is for the commercial purpose.
In view of the above discussion, the complainant is not a consumer in terms of section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Therefore this commission lacks jurisdiction to try the case.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
the instant complaint case be and the same is dismissed in the light of the observation made above.
