Order-18.
Date-16/03/2016.
Complainant Sai Babu Pal by filing this complaint has submitted that complainant deals with supply of packaging of kacchighani mustard oil, soya oil and refined oil etc. and op is running business in supplying of packaged kacchighani mustard oil, soya oil and refined oil from the op’s place of business.
Amongst few other dealers or suppliers the op is one from whom the complainant purchased kacchighani mustard oil by paying a sum of Rs. 10,78,965/-. Accordingly complainant supplied the said oil to various shops in and around the locality and those shops wherein the oil were delivered and/or supplied sold out the oil to their customers.
All on a sudden all the shopkeepers started complaining to the complainant that the oil that was supplied to them by complainant were purely sub-standard, piled and impure. As a result of such complaints all the shopkeepers blocked entire payment of complainant that were lying due by the shopkeepers and when complainant approached the customers/shopkeepers, they stated that they shall lodge complaints against the complainant and proceed accordingly before the appropriate court of law for supplying sub-standard, impure and piled kacchighani mustard oil.
On hearing the news complainant immediately intimated the op and accordingly op took back the remaining stock of oil which were lying under complainant and adjust the amount to that effect i.e. Rs. 84,026/-.
It is further submitted that the quantity of oil that were already sold by the complainant to the shops were unpaid on the pretext that the oil supplied were sub-standard, piled and impure. Though complainant requested the op to pay Rs. 9,94,939/- towards clearance of the blocked or forfeited amount by the shopkeepers. But on request made by the complainant due to supply of the sub-standard, piled and impure kacchighani mustard oil supplied by op, complainant lost his reputation in the market and it is to such an extent that the shopkeepers denied to purchase even a branded company oil namely Sundrop from the complainant alleging that complainant supplied sub-standard, piled and impure kacchighani mustard oil and by that way op has lowered the business graph of complainant which is also a massive setback for running the business.
Complainant on several occasions requested op to settle the dispute and take back the remaining stock of kacchighani mustard oil from the complainant, but the op did not care. Getting no feedback from the op, complainant was compelled to send a legal notice through his Ld. Advocate dated 20.05.2015 asking the op to refund the entire amount within 15 days and also for further relief and for taking back all the sub-standard, piled and impure oil. Against that legal notice op by a letter dated 06.06.2015 stated that the entire story of complainant is concocted and only not to pay outstanding dues, complainant has submitted that op is liable to pay the entire amount.
In the meantime some shopkeepers returned the stock of the said oil which weighs about 70 to 80 liters and the same is lying in the custody of complainant and complainant finding no other alternative, complainant approached before this Forum and the dispute for vexatious remedy.
In fact op has adopted unfair trade practices for which op should be penalized and necessary redressal shall be given to the complainant.
On the other hand op by filing written version submitted that the entire complaint is false, fabricated, concocted and it is specifically mentioned that complainant purchased the goods in question as a capacity of Distributor not as a Consumer as defined under the C.P. Act, 1986. So, the claim of the complainant as consumer is not tenable.
Fact remains that complainant committed various offences and violated the terms and conditions of the distributorship agreement duly signed and accepted by complainant himself for which complainant is liable to face civil and criminal consequences for commission of his illegal act but complainant cleverly filed the complaint case before the Ld. Forum against the op with vexatious allegations.
Since complainant purchased the goods not for self consumption but for the purpose of resale of the said goods even without any modification of such goods to the retailers as large scale and nor even sold to the consumers. Then the present complaint is not maintainable as complainant is not a consumer and as per provision of Section 2(1)(d) and complainant cannot be a consumer when he is a person who obtain such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose. Accordingly complainant is not treated as consumer.
In fact as on 01.04.2014 to 02.05.2015 there was due of Rs. 3,78,845/- recoverable from the complainant and when that was claimed, complainant filed this false claim claiming the oil is impure, piled etc. In fact complainant’s some stock was damaged which was inspected by the op and it was found that some was damaged by rat bite, cockroach attack and as per the terms the said damaged goods cannot be taken back but even then op returned back the said goods on 31.03.2015 for amounting to Rs. 84,026/- and same amount has been adjusted and after adjustment there was outstanding due of Rs. 2,94,819/- which the complainant is liable to pay to op and as per said agreement goods received by the distributor will be considered as goods delivery. No leakage claim will be entertained after the receipt of the goods.
In fact complainant has no valid existence of valid VAT Account Number but he is continuing the business illegally by violating the provisions of the law of the land and it is also the matter of fact that the distributorship was granted and allowed in the name of one Swanky Marketing, proprietor Babu Paul of 165, AghoreSarani, (Near Location Barendrapara, SoniMandir), Rajpur, Kolkata – 700149 and in fact goods were delivered in the name of the said Swanky Marketing but complainant made the payment through the bank account of Ekta Food Products, complainant failed to furnish the same to ops and for which there is a complication. But complainant did not pay sum and thereafter filed a false and vexatious complaint and there is no document to show that the supplied goods were damaged or impure or piled. In the above circumstances, this complaint should be dismissed.
Decision with reasons
After careful consideration of the complaint and written version, it is found that in the present case vital question is whether complainant is a consumer or not and in this regard it is clear that complainant as distributor purchased the said goods from the op and no doubt complainant admitted that after purchasing he sold it to different shopkeepers.
So, it is clear that for resale he purchased the same and sold it to the consumer/shopkeepers and as per provision of Section 2(1)(d) and also explanation, we find that the meaning of word Consumer is particularly stated in the C.P. Act, 1986 to the effect that the consumer as the terms implies is one who consumes. As per the definition consumer is the one who purchases goods for private use or consumption. The meaning of the word consumer is broadly stated in the above definition so as to include anyone who consumes goods or services at the end of the chain of production. The comprehensive definition aims at covering every man who pays money as the price or cost of goods and services. The consumer deserves to get that he pays for in real quantity and true quality. In every society, consumer remains the centre of gravity of all business and industrial activity. He needs protection from the manufacturer, producer, supplier, wholesaler and retailer.
But in the present case as per definition Consumer is one who purchases the goods for private use or consumption. But in the present case, complainant purchased goods for not private use or for not own use but for resale for his business and make profit and for which it is proved that complainant purchased the said articles from the op as a dealer not for his own use or for his family use or for private use or for his consumption. So, his purchasecomes under the purview of commercial purpose and the words for any commercial purpose are intended to cover cases other than those of resale of concerned goods and the words for any commercial purpose are wide enough to take in all cases where goods are purchased for being used in any activity directly intended to generate profit. According to the meaning given in standard dictionaries, the expression commercial means – connected with, or engaged in commerce, mercantile. having profit as the main aim.
So, the expression of commerce as given in the present case simply proves that the present oil was purchased by the complainant for resale and for the purpose of earning profit and no doubt complainant bought goods for resale.
So, complainant is not a consumer for which the present complaint is not tenable. At the same time complainant failed to prove by any cogent evidence or documents or test report that the articles are impure, piled one.
In the light of the above observation and also relying upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Laxmi Engineering Works Vs P.S.G. Industrial Institute on 04.04.1995 reported in 1995 AIR 1428, 1995 SCC (3) 583, we are of view that complaint is not maintainable as complainant is not a consumer under op.
In the result, this complaint fails but for filing such vexatious complaint as a top business man should be imposed penal cost.
Hence, it is
ORDERED
That the complaint be and the same is dismissed on contest against the op and complainant is imposed penal cost of Rs. 10,000/- which should be paid to this Forum within one month from the date of this order failing which 9 percent interest p.a. over the same shall be calculated till full realization of the said penal cost and if complainant fails to pay the same within the stipulated period, in that case penal action shall be started against complainant for which further penalty and fine shall be imposed.
