West Bengal

Purba Midnapur

CC/07/2014

Palash Khatua, Son of Shri Madhusudan Khatuan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager, Magma Fin Corp. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

10 Feb 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
PURBA MEDINIPUR
ABASBARI, P.O. TAMLUK, DIST. PURBA MEDINIPUR,PIN. 721636
TELEFAX. 03228270317
 
Complaint Case No. CC/07/2014
 
1. Palash Khatua, Son of Shri Madhusudan Khatuan
Vill.- Kola, P.O. and P.S.- Kolaghat Dist.- Purba Medinipur
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri Ashok Kumar Bhattacharyya, W.B.H.J.S. PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sri Rituraj Dey, M.A. Eng. MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

Hazira is filed on behalf of the complainant through his Ld. Advocate. A Xerox copy of a letter is filed by the complainant over the matter of admission hearing of this case. Seen and considered the petition of complaint as also the documents filed.

 

The complainant states in his complaint that he is a registered owner of the case Truck being no. W.B.-29-8885 Ten wheelers TaTa Motors Ltd. LPT-2515 which was financed by the OP-s Finance co. ltd. and the said truck being financed by the OP for his business purpose. It is further stated that he paid insurance premium of the said truck for the year 2011 and also paid enhanced premium as per instruction of the OP and then he requested the OP to pay insurance policy premium further in due time, but the office of the OP did not take any action in this regard for which the said insurance policy had been expired on 20.11.2013 and as a result the complainant could not run the said truck for want of renewed insurance policy and he sustained loss of Rs.550000. which he invested for his truck, hence the said case for relief as to refund of Rs.550000. and other reliefs.

 

Considered the submissions of ld. Advocate for the complainant.

 

There is no whisper in the petition of complaint as to any cause of action wholly or in part arises, if any, within the local limit of this Forum’s jurisdiction.

 

The OP carries on business on the address of Kolkata -16, which is not the local limit of jurisdiction of this Forum. Apart from that admittedly the complainant took financial help from the OP as to the truck in question for his business purpose, i.e. for commercial purpose.

 

It is not stated in his petition of complaint that the services from the OP was availed of by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment.

 

In the circumstances as aforesaid, we feel that the instant complaint is not maintainable as per provision of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Accordingly, the instant petition of complaint is rejected, i.e. the instant case be and the same is dismissed since not maintainable.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Sri Ashok Kumar Bhattacharyya, W.B.H.J.S.]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri Rituraj Dey, M.A. Eng.]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.