Order No. 2                                                Date :  03.8.2015.

          The petitioner is present.

          This date was fixed for hearing on admission of this case filed by the petitioner, Sri Ashok Kumar Damani, against M/S. Dhruv Agro, praying  for direction upon the o.p. to pay Rs. 5,94,096/- with statutory interest @ 18% p.a. from 13.6.2012 till realization and to pay Rs. 2,50,000/- as compensation for unnecessary harassment and litigation costs.

          In support of his case the petitioner filed documents stating that he being the proprietor of M/S.  Sun Rays which is a business house carrying on Business at  N.H. No. 6, Industrial Estate, Dhulagari, P.S. Sankrail, and he used to purchase various sizes of cans containing sauces, mushrooms etc. The o.p. placed an order for  80,400 cans for a sum of Rs. 9,84,096/- and he  got Rs. 4 lakhs in total and thus there was a balance due of Rs. 5,84,096/- and the o.p. did not pay the said amount forcing the petitioner to file this case.

While  hearing this case on admission this Forum finds that in order to admit a case the Forum has to see whether the petitioner is a consumer and whether the dispute arises therein is a consumer dispute and also whether the petitioner paid sufficient court fees and whether the case is barred by limitation and also within the territorial as well as financial jurisdiction of this Forum and whether is maintainable.

In the C.P. Act, 1986 it  is laid down the definition of consumer and also that of a consumer dispute. This Forum has jurisdiction to entertain a complaint as consumer dispute only and the petitioner has to show before the Forum that he is a consumer and there is a consumer dispute.

          In the instant case the petitioner is a business institution which purchased thousand of cans for his business and the dispute arose for non payment of money. Here the petitioner cannot be a consumer as the petitioner is a business house and nor running business for self employment  and made purchase for making profit in his business and thus the petitioner not being a consumer and the dispute not being a consumer dispute.  This Forum cannot entertain this case after hearing the same at admission stage.

Hence,

                                O r d e r e d   

That the C C No. 275 of 2014 be and the same is rejected in the admission stage.

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    B. D.  Nanda   )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F., Howrah.