Haryana

Charkhi Dadri

CC/61/2024

Ankit Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Indotech Elevators Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Kuldeep Legha

08 May 2024

ORDER

Present:          Sh. Kuldeep Legha, Advocate  for the complainant.

                        Shri Ankit Kumar (hereinafter referred as “Complainant) filed a complaint  against M/s. Indotech Elevators Private Ltd., Hissar (hereinafter referred as Opposite Party or “OP”) which was registered as Consumer Complainant No. 61 dated 07/05/2024.

A brief of the complaint is that the complaint had purchased a lift i.e. elevator machine vide certificate number INDOTECH/HSR/SLS/QTN/018-9028. The same was under free maintenance for the period from 02/03/2022 to 01/03.2024. It was submitted that after two months of installation, there was a grave deficiency in the elevator machine. The OP was informed regarding the fault who repaired but same was not repaired properly. The visiting Engineer assured to sort out its mechanic fault, but except assurance nothing was proceeded properly. It is further submitted that elevator was under warranty period for five years. On the complaint again, OP’s Engineer visited the site and on the pretext of its repair some costly equipment were removed but same were not installed till date of filing this complainant. There is a deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  Hence, the present complaint was filed.

                        The complainant has filed the present complaint in the capacity of Proprietor of Bombay Readymade House, Badhra. Prime-facie, it appears that the Lift was installed/used for his business for commercial purpose. In view of the same, the complainant does not fall under ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

                        In this connection, relevant clause i.e. 2(7) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act is reproduced below:-

“(i) buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose.”

 

                        In the light of foregoing, we opine that it is not a fit case for summoning of the OP by issuing notice by this Commission and continue with the present complaint. Therefore, the complaint of complainant being not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act, in the present form, does not merits consideration and deserves to be dismissed. Hence, the same is hereby dismissed.

                        Copy of the order be supplied to complainant free of cost. File be consigned to the record-room.

 

                                Member                                                           President

                         District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commision, Charkhi Dadri

Dated: 8^th May, 2024.