(Passed this on 08th January, 2019)
Shri. Avinash V. Prabhune, Member –
Heard the Counsel for Complainant & perused the Complaint with all documents.
In the present complaint, it is evident that the Complainant is private limited company registered under the companies Act 1956. It is involved in manufacturing business related to animal feeds in name & style Meghtaj Agrovet Pvt ltd. As per their own averments in the complaint, Complainant has availed Term loan (Rs 4,06,69,989) & Cash credit loan (Rs 1,99,79,882) for business activities from OPs.
Matter was heard for admission hearing on following dates
11th Oct 2018, Counsel of Complainant sought time for filing judgments on the issue of holding complainant as ‘Consumer’ within the definition of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for the present case
25th Oct 2018 Complainant & his counsel were absent.
16th Nov 2018 Matter adjourned against the request from Complainant’s counsel.
29th Nov 2018 Matter adjourned against the request from Complainant’s counsel.
21st Dec 2018 Complainant’s counsel gave submissions at bar that she would withdraw complaint on the next date. But today she is absent (8/1/2019).
It can be seen that Complainant is the commercial organization & had obtained loan for its Business activities, therefore, Loan taken for manufacturing business is certainly a commercial activity. It cannot be said that Loan was taken by Complainant for any personal use or for earning livelihood by means of self employment. Considering the commercial activities & nature of business carried out by the Complainant, Forum is of the firm opinion that present Complainant is not entitled to be considered as ‘Consumer’ within definition of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
Complaint deserves to be dismissed, hence dismissed.
ORDER
1) Complaint is dismissed at admission stage.
2) No order as to costs.
3) Certified copy of this order be supplied to Complainant.
