Order No.3                  Date: 25.05.2023

Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present.

The matter is taken up for admission hearing.

The complainant averred in her complaint application that she possesses entrepreneurial skill and mind set and she is a house wife. The complainant availed finance facility i.e. loan on 05.02.2017 for sum of Rs.23,10,902/- (Rupees twenty three lakhs ten thousand nine hundred and two) only payable by 46 monthly instalments on hypothecation of the Hyundai R80-7 Hydraulic Excavator. Accordingly, the complainant started to pay monthly instalment as per terms of loan contract but due to Covid 19 pandemic, she could not continue to pay the instalments of loan. With an intent to close the loan, the complainant negotiated with a representative of the opposite party nos. 1 and 2 and it was settled that the final amount would be Rs.8,00,000/-(Rupees eight lakhs) only which will be payable by 4 instalments. The complainant was asked to pay Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only to opposite parties for issuance of letter of settlement and accordingly the complainant paid the amount through NEFT from Indian Bank, Hasnabad Branch, 24 Parganas (N).

Thereafter, the complainant made series of correspondences on 04.12.2020, 27.01.2022, 22.02.2022, 31.03.2022, 17.05.2022 and 14.11.2022. In spite of several follow-ups and effort, the opposite parties are reluctant for settlement of  closure of the loan account and made a complaint before fictitiously constituted forum of arbitration for recovery of the due loan amount. Such unlawful act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice. It is alleged that the complainant is therefore entitled to get adequate compensation for being harassed in the manner stated above.

Perused and considered the complaint application and the photo copy of the documents annexed thereto.

Letter dated 04.12.2020, 05.01.2021, 22.02.2022 and 31.03.2022 reveal that Advocate Mrs.Supriya Mandal sent those letters on behalf of her client Rina Bar, the complainant herein, to M/s SREI Equipment Finance Limited praying for time to pay the due instalments of loan amount. By letter dated 14.11.2022, the same Advocate on behalf of her client Rina Bar requested to send the settlement letter to pay off the loan by 4  instalments. Every letter mentioned above and the email annexed reveal that the complainant purchased one Hyundai R80-7 Hydraulic Excavator Machine being Engine no. 4H.2298/1620240, Machine Serial no. N101D01397 on taking loan from the opposite parties.

It is also apparent that such machine as per specification is used commercially in the construction activity and it was purchased by the complainant for being used in its activity directly intended to generate income and profit.

So, it can safely be presumed that such machine had been purchased by the complainant on obtaining loan from the opposite parties to generate income from her business. The complainant herself stated that she has a business mind-set but still a house wife which certainly indicates that she herself is not running her business on self employment for her livelihood. She has not averred the same in her pleading also.

Dexterous skill is evident in the drafting of the complaint application to give the civil problem a flavour of consumer dispute, which is certainly abuse of the process of law.

Having considered the discussion made above, we are of the opinion that the complainant is not a consumer in terms of section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and therefore this commission lacks jurisdiction to try the case. The complaint case cannot be admitted and liable to be rejected.

Hence, it is

ORDERED

that the complaint case be and the same is dismissed as not maintainable in law.