IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

                                           CASE No.  CC/67/2018

 Date of Filing:                    Date of Admission:                 Date of Disposal:

   10.04.2018                               03.05.2018                                 01.12.2022    

Complainant:        Uttam Pal,

                               S/O Lt. Harendranath Pal,

       Vill- Ramipur,

       P.O. Islampur,

       P.S.-Islampur,

       Dist-Murshidabad,

       Pin 742304.

-Vs-

Opposite Party:  1. Authorised Dealer

        S.N. Motors Pvt Ltd,

                    NH34, Mankara,

        P.O.- Balarampur,

        P.S.- Berhampur,

                  Dist- Murshidabad

                   Pin-742165        

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant                        : Debanshu Sengupta

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party                     : Debraj Mukherjee

           Present:   Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.     

  Sri. Subir Sinha Roy………………………………….Member.                        

                             Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.

FINAL ORDER

   SMT. ALOKA BANDYOPADHYAY,  MEMBER

   This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

One Rabiul Islam (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Bajaj Molla Auto and Ors.  (here in after referred to as the OPs) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

 The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-

The complainant  purchased a Mahindra Maxximo Car for his business on 25.07.2014 from S.N. Motors Pvt. Ltd for which he has taken loan from Magma Finerop Limited and paid Rs. 1,10,000/- as down payment and monthly installments amount of Rs. 7350/-. The complainant agreed to pay 48^th installments and S.N.Motors agreed to supply all original documents along with registration certificate within 3 months but till date O.P. has not supplied the said relevant documents for which the complainant is suffering loss as he is unable to ply the said vehicle due to want of documents though he has paid 36^th installments amounts to the Magma Finerop Limited. Finding no other alternative the complainant filed the instant case before the District Commission for appropriate relief.

Defence Case

After due service of the notice the O.P. appeared before this Commission by filing Written Version contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable as the petitioner has purchased the said vehicle for the purpose of business and the complainant has not paid any fees regarding the registration of the vehicle to the O.P. So, the case is liable to be dismissed against the O.P.

Points for decision

1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?

2. Have the OPs any deficiency in service, as alleged?

3. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?

Decision with Reasons:

Point no.1, 2 & 3

All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.

As per petition of complaint the complainant purchased a Mahindra Maxximo Car for his business on 25.07.2014 from S.N. Motors Pvt. Ltd for which he has taken loan from Magma Finerop Limited and paid Rs. 1,10,000/- as down payment and monthly installments amount of Rs. 7350/-.

The O.P.  in his  Written Version stated that complainant has admitted the fact that he has purchased the vehicle for the purpose of business i.e., for commercial purpose.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that the complainant has not filed any documents regarding the payment of registration charges and moreover he has written in the petition of complaint that he has purchased the vehicle for business which is for commercial purpose. As per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and Consumer Protection Act, 2019 the complainant is not entitled to get any relief from the Consumer Forum/Commission if anything purchased for commercial purpose. So, we are declined to pass any order in this case. So, the case is liable to be dismissed.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 10.04.2018 and admitted on 03.05.2018. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.

In the result, the Consumer case is dismissed.

 Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is

Ordered

that the complaint Case No. CC/67/2018 be and the same is dismissed against the O.P without any order as to costs.

Let plain copy of this order  be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand  /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

    confonet.nic.in

Dictated & corrected by me.

Member

 Member                                                            Member                                        President.