Heard learned counsel for the complainant on the question of entertainability of this complaint by this Commission. -2- Through this complaint, the complainant has claimed a sum of Rs.1,84,96,429/- alongwith interest @18% per annum from the date of complaint till its realization from the opposite party-Bank alleging deficiency in service on its part, which has been fully detailed in the body of the complaint. In a nutshell, the case of the complainant is that he is engaged in the business of trading Aluminum scrap, which he mainly imports from Dubai. He had an account with the opposite party-Bank and had obtained a Key Cash Credit (one time limit) of Rs.50,00,000/-. He had imported a consignment of Aluminum Scrap of Rs.99,26,451/- which could not be immediately sold out due to big recession in the market in the relevant period of 2008-09 and, therefore, the amount could not be paid to the bank within the stipulated period. The stocks were hypothecated with the opposite party-Bank. Taking all the averments and allegations made in the complaint on their face value and at this stage, assuming that the complainant may be able to substantiate the same one day, still we are of the opinion that the complaint for the relief claimed by the complainant is not maintainable before this Commission. We say so because going -3- ]by the complainant’s own admission in the complainant, the complainant had availed the services of the Bank within the meaning of Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The service so provided by the Bank and received by the complainant was purely for commercial purpose. The definition of ‘consumer’ as was existing in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was substantially modified by amending Act No. 62 of 2002 w.e.f. 15.3.2003 by which amendment, any person who availed the services of any service provider for commercial purpose has been taken out from the purview of the term ‘consumer’ as appearing in clause (d) of Section 2 (1) of the said Act. This being the legal position, the complainant cannot be said to be a ‘consumer’ within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the said Act. The complaint is accordingly, dismissed, however, with liberty to the complainant to pursue his remedy before appropriate court/forum in accordance with law. |
