Delhi

West Delhi

CC/23/395

RAVI KUMAR KOHLI - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S S.S TRADERS & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

20 Oct 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-III: WEST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

C-BLOCK, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PANKHA ROAD, JANAK PURI

NEW DELHI

Complaint Case No.395/2023

 

In the matter of:

 

	Ravi Kumar @ Pappi Lahiri, S/o Nand Lal Kohli, R/o H.No. 1, Ajay Enclave Extn., Opposite Radha Swami Satsang, WestDelhi-110018   …………Complainant
	Versus

1. M/s S.S. Traders,

Office At G/2, C-Block,

Complex Naraina,

New Delhi-110028     

                             

2. Suraj Kumar,

Senior Customer Executive

Varun Beverages Ltd.,

G/2, C-Block, Rukmani Complex,

Naraina Vihar, New Delhi-110028                      …..Opposite Parties

 

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:    DATE OF DECISION:

25.09.2023 18.10.2023 20.10.2023

 

Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, President

Ms.Richa Jindal, Member

Mr. Anil Kumar Koushal, Member

Order passed by Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, President

 

ORDER

1. Fresh Complaint heard on admission admitted case of the Complainant is that his running business of Pappi Lahiri near Ajanta(now Miraz) Cinema and in due course of business he had purchased few Pepsi Lehar Soda bottles in May, 2023 from OP 1 who is a distributor of Pepsi Lehar Co.. However, when he sold the said bottles to his customers, they fell ill with problems of vomiting, stomach ache, cough and cold etc. and Complainant received several complainants from his customers in this regard. Later when the Complainant checked these bottles sold to his customers, he noticed some germs and moss in the contents and when he complained about it to the OPs regarding the same, he was threatened by them. Due to sale of such bottles by him, Complainant has submitted that he has lost his good reputation and loss of earning consequently since his business is ruined. He has, therefore, filed the present complaint praying for compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/- from OPs.
2. We observe from the purchase Invoice dated 23/07/2023 of the subject bottle that evidently that the complainant had purchased the said bottles for his stall to be further sold to his customers. Therefore the same were clearly purchased for resale and such purchase cannot entitle him to be a consumers within the meaning of the definition of consumer given U/s 7(1) of the CPA, 2019. We are guided in this regard by the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in Lucknow Egg Stall Vs Venkatakrishana Egg Centre (1994) II CPJ 117 (NC) wherein similar complaint was raised by the complainant for failure to supply certain quality eggs and Hon’ble National Commission had dismissed the complaint holding that the since complainant had purchased egg for the purpose of resale, he cannot be regarded as a consumer. We accordingly dismiss the present complaint in limine as not maintainable, complainant not being a consumer and goods purchased for resale.
3. Let the copy of this order be made available to the complainant on application for free certified copy under the name of President of this Commission as per guidelines of Hon’ble  SCDRC.
4. Announced on 21.10.2023.
5. File be consigned to record room after pronouncement of order.

 

 

Richa Jindal                        Anil Kumar Koushal                   Sonica Mehrotra

(Member)                                     (Member)                                      (President)