DATE OF FILING                    :        02.03.2015.

DATE OF S/R                            :       20.04.2015.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :         25.08.2015. 

1. S.A. CONSTRUCTION

   Having a its Regd. Office at

   105, Rajballav Saha lane P.S. & Dist Howrah

   And Branch office at 110/1/B, Kalikundu Lane,

   P.S. Bantra and Dist Howrah

   Represented by its partners (1) SRI SUBRATA ROY

   S/O late Gour Mohan Roy of 105, Rajballav Saha Lane,

   P.S. and Dist. Howrah.

    

2. SRI ASIT GOLUI

   S/O late Bibhuti Bhushan Golui,

   Of  3, Beharilal Chakraborty Lane,

   P.S. and Dist. Howrah.. ………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.

   - Versus   -

    

   1.         Adams Lift and Escalator Private Limited

   34, Ahiripukur Road, Flat No. 4A/B, Front Block,

   Kolkata. 700 019.  …………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.

    

P    R    E     S    E    N     T

Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.

F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

Both parties are present. This date was fixed for hearing on non-maintainability petition filed by the O.P. stating that the petitioner in this case is a partnership company namely S.A Construction in the business of developing and building construction and in connection with the construction of a multistoried building, the petitioner booked a lift in the O.P. company. The petitioner runs business to earn profit and so not a consumer under the CP Act 1986 and the petition case filed by him should be dismissed with cost.

            The Ld. Counsel of the petitioner S.A Construction though not filed any written objection to the non-maintainability petition yet vehemently objected to such allegation as petitioner stating that the petitioner is at consumer and so this Forum admitted the case.

            This Forum heard the Ld. Counsel and perused the original petition and also the non maintainability petition and keeping in mined the submission of the Ld. Counsel of both sides and the provision of law as led down the CP Act 1986 in respect to definition of consumer were in it has been stated that consumer is a person who consumer. U/S 2 (1) (d) of the CP Act 1986 it is stated that consumer means any person who buys in goods or services for consideration and excluded persons who purchase goods for resale or for commercial purpose. In the instant case the petitioner wonted to purchase the lift for installation in the multistoried building which is promoted by the petitioner for the purpose of the earning profit. Ld. Counsel for the O.P. refers before this Forum to decision of the National Commission be III (2013)CPJ 464 (NC) and 2013 (3) CPR465 (NC) where in it is opined that when any one make purchase for commercial purpose then he is not a consumer and also a partnership firm which is engaged is promoting business also is not a consumer and in our case the petitioner being developer cum promoter engaged in profit making business being a partnership firm also can not be said to be a consumer.

            In view above disconnection the non maintainability petition file by O.P. in allowed on contest and the claim case is not maintainable before this Forum.

            Hence,

                                O r d e r e d   

That in view of non-maintainability being allowed the C C No. 88 of 2015 not being maintainable and the same is dismissed on contest.

Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.      

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    B. D.  Nanda   )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F., Howrah.