JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.      In the verification of this complaint, the complainant himself stated that “I, Shri Ashok R. Mehra, aged: 57 years Self employed/ Business as Manufacturer- Importer of raw materials for Anti Freeze- Coolants, DEGREASERS, DEG. MEG, TEG & Cleaning Solvent at Thane, District – Maharashtra, the Complainant hereby verifies and declares that what has been stated in the Complaint and relevant documents attached herein are true & correct to my personal knowledge & belief”. 

2.      These are the antecedents of the complainant.  By no stretch of imagination, he can be said to be earning the profit from the self employment.  He is earning profits for the commercial purposes.  His main grouse is that he purchased raw material from China and the same came out to be defective.  He has moved this complaint with the following prayers:-

“(B) Therefore the complainant prays before this Hon’ble Commission that it be pleased to appreciate the complaint with all its supporting and direct the opponents to severally and jointly pay, including an interim order to pay the costs and collect the material on priority:-

(a) With respect to section 14(c) of the COPRA, The Opponents be held responsible and accountable and be guided/ordered to reimburse the cost incurred in the above importation/procurement process which being CFR-US$ 1,27,696 Remitted to the supplier, Insurance Cost +Surveys @ 1.125% = US$1,437 + Indian Customs duty of 25.849% paid correspondingly = US$ 33,380 + clearing & Forwarding of 10X 20 FT – FCL @ 5.500 per FCL =US$ 55,000
Ex Port, Customs etc.  Thus, Total = US $2,17,513 Converted @ INRs 56 = INR Rs.1,21,80,728 and honour the genuine Claims per claim working sheet attached herewith at Page No. 30 & with timelines coupled with interest @ 1.5% PM – Compounded with civil liabilities for dilatory tactics & or non-compliance in time, thereafter.

(b)  With respect to section 14(d) of the COPRA, A sum of Rs.38,74,304 (thirty eight lakhs seventy four thousand three hundred and four only), being compensation for loss inflicted on the complainant due to negligence of the Opponents and in the intervening period prices escalating of like materials in the international market from an average prices of US$ 694 to US$ 1070-CFR-Navi Mumbai, from the international markets.  Thus on 184 MT the cost difference was @ 376 PMT = US$ 69,184 X Rs. 56/ per US$ = Compensatory claims Supported with amount of Rs.38,74,304, as is evident from copy of the alternate suppliers invoice attached at Exhibit X at page 65 & 66.

(c) Further, with respect to section 14(d) of the COPRA, the cost of interest on losses suffered in the above transaction @18% PA – currently amounting to Rs.7,22,477 and the same be ordered to Compounded and be paid by the Opponents, from the date of filing this complaint until full & final satisfactory settlement of the same.

(d) Further, with respect to section 14(i) of The COPRA, the adequate cost of this litigation @Rs.25,000/- [Rs. Twenty- five thousand ] per dates attended by us from Mumbai, at Delhi be added into this claim when determined for pronouncement and paid with a minimum of Rs.1,25,000 [One lakh twenty-five thousand]

(e) Further, with respect to section 14(d) R/w Section 2(nnn) & ® of the COPRA, EXEMPLARY PUNITIVE Damages on account of loss of Economical & financial opportunities inflicted on the Complainant be awarded and imposed on the OpponeNts against their DECEPTIVE TRACE PRACTICE  with supplies of sub-standard materials into India.

(f)  With respect to section 14(hb), (hc) of COPRA, the Ministry of External affairs & or the Ministry of Finance & or The Ministry of Commerce and or a NGO like the Lions Clubs International/ Rotary International, be also directed to advertise in all leading papers in INDIA as the opponents operates, at the cost of Opponents & provide list of ALL such complaint cases lodged with it since 01 Sept. 2009, in this fashion till date & review may be taken up to recoup the CONSUMERS of its Losses with interest & fines due to such DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES, adopted by all Suppliers ex China into India

(g) In the alternative, with due respect to section 14(hb) of COPRA the INDIAN-Ministry of External Affairs & or the Ministry of Finance & or The Ministry of Commerce/The Department of Commerce & Industry be directed to file on Oath the total complaint received by from till date a sum in excess of 5%(five) or upto 20% per cent of its Biz done be disgorged from the above said Opponent No. 1, for encouraging DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICE and 50% of such funds collected may be provided to the NGO at Mumbai, to create awareness among Consumers, and guide them & service the afflicted CONSUMERS in India.

(h)  Any other orders including INTERIM orders, as deemed fit & proper to meet justice in this beleaguered case.”

3.      By no stretch of imagination, the petitioner can be stated to be a ‘consumer’ as per the definition occurring in clause (d) of Section 2 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, which clearly specifically and unequivocally mentions but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose. 

4.      Moreover do the jurisdiction of consumer court extends to China.  No such rule, regulation or law was cited.  Has the consumer court the power to summon the Chinese citizens/or firms under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986? 

5.      Consequently, we hereby dismiss the complaint with costs in the sum of Rs.10,000/- which will be deposited with the Consumer Welfare Fund established by the Central Government under Section 12(3) read with Rule 10(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, of the Central Excise Act, 1944 within two months from today, failing which it will carry interest @9% per annum till its realization.  Learned Registrar of this Commission shall see compliance of the order under Section 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and report the matter before this Commission immediately after expiry of two months. 

6.      However, the necessary documents if so required be returned to the petitioner and he is given the liberty to approach the appropriate forum for seeking redress to his grievance as per law.