Challenge in these proceedings is to the order dated 10.01.2011 passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes

-2-

Redressal Commission, Panchkula (in short, ‘the State Commission’) in first appeal No. 1639 of 2007.  The appeal before the State Commission was filed against the order dated 30.04.2007 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Ambala, by which the District Consumer Forum had allowed the complaint of the complaint and quashed certain bills issued by the opposite party-Nigam imposing certain penalty.   The State Commission in appeal has set aside the said order mainly on the ground that the complainant being a commercial entity and having availed the services of the Nigam purely for commercial purpose was not a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d)(o) stands amended by the Amending Act No. 62 of 2002 effective from 15.3.2003. 

In our view, the order passed by the State Commission is strictly in accordance with law and the settled legal position as has been stated by this Commission and the Supreme Court in number of cases.  The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality, material irregularity or any jurisdictional error, which calls for any interference in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21(b) of the

-3-

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The revision petition is dismissed with the observation that the petitioner may pursue his remedy otherwise if so permissible.