DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.

C. C.-229/2017

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

28.04.2017                                  30.05.2017                                           11.04.2018

Complainant:  Sankha Das, The Director of K.C. Das Grandson Private Limited,

                           25A, Nakuleshwar Bhattacharjee Lane, P.O.-Kalighat,

                           P.S.-Tollygunge, Kolkata-700 026.

                                                                  Vs.

Opposite Parties:-    1)The Area Manager (Kolkata), Bharti Airtel Limited,

                                         Circle Office, Infinity Building, 5^th Floor,

                                         Electronics Complex, Block-GP, Salt Lake,

                                         Sector-V, Kolkata-700 091.

                                    2) Solanki Sengupta, The Sales Executive of

                                         Bharti Airtel Limited, Infinity Building, 5^th Floor

                                         Electronics Complex, Block-GP, Salt lake Sector-V

                                         Kolkata-700 091.

                                    3) The Director, Bharti Airtel Limited, Bharti Crescent,

                                         1, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, Phase-II,

                                         New Delhi-110 070.

P R E S E N T     :-    Sri. Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay………….President.

                            :-   Smt. Silpi Majumder………………………………Member.

FINAL ORDER

This complaint is filed by the Complainant u/S 12 of the Consumer protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs did not reconnect five numbers of mobile connection under CUG Plan and 1 number of 4G Dongle connection till filing of this complaint.

During argument the Complainant has submitted and admitted that service was availed of by the Complainant from the OPs for commercial purpose. It is also admitted by him that he being the Director of the Private Limited Company as mentioned in the cause title of the complaint service was hired for several Directors of the said Company. It is further stated by the Complainant the being the Director of the Company he is carrying on business for commercial purpose and for the said business service was hired from the OPs. Therefore as the Complainant availed of service from the OPs for commercial purpose, hence the Complainant cannot be regarded as ‘Consumer’ in view of the Section 2(1) (d) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Going by the foregoing discussion hence it is ordered that the Consumer Complaint being no-229/2017 is hereby dismissed on contest without any cost. However the Complainant is at liberty to approach before the appropriate Court, if not barred otherwise.

Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per the provision of the CPR, 2005.     

Member                                                                                          President

Dictated & Corrected by