Sri A.K.Patra,President

1. The captioned Consumer Complaint is filed by the complainant   alleging   deficiency in service &  unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties for supply of old defective vehicle on the pretext of new one and for delayed in supply of the vehicle even after receiving of the price of the same in advance .
2. The Complainant seeks for an order directing the O.P No.1 & 4 to provide a new tractor and further the OP 2 & 3 be directed to borne the instalment amount as applicable form the date of providing of the vehicle by O.P No.2 & 3 and to direct   for exemption of monthly instalment due from 1^st payment of the complainant towards  the vehicle till disposal of this consumer complaint and prayed for all other reliefs which are just & proper in the best  the interest of the consumer .
3. Brief facts of the present complaint are that, the complainant had applied for a tractor loan form O.P No. 1 & 2 by depositing down payment of Rs.2,00,000/- (Two Lakh) only with  the O.P No.1 on 29.06.2017 . The said amount was deposited in instalment of Rs.50,000/- , Rs.50,000/- ,Rs.50,000/- Rs.25,000/- and Rs.25,000/-.It is further stated that, the O.P No. 1 introduced the complaint with O.P No. 2 and assured for finance of the Indofarm Tractor 3040 , SI model and delivered a tractor head to the complainant. It is further stated that, documentation work had to be done by the O.P No.1 and 2 as the vehicle was transacted for finance form O.P No.2, in the mean while 6 months passed. The  complainant had approached the O.ps several time but they were taking some plea for delay of registration. After around ten month, one day in the month of May 2018, the proprietor of Swaraj Automobile, Bhawanipatna came to the resident of the complainant and approached the complainant for return of the tractor, stating that , mistakenly the tractor was delivered to the complainant which was already registered in some ones names .The complainant replied that, he has paid money for the tractor so cannot return it  , then the O.P No.1 assured to provide a new tractor and till then requested to use an old tractor instead of new tractor for which the complainant handed  over the said tractor to the O.P No,.1.One week later the O.P No.2 and his staff come to the house of complainant and told that, the tractor model 2035 SI is a financed tractor and who gave you permission to  use the same and threatened to lodge FIR against the complainant for which & under fear he handed over the same to the O.P No.2.Due to above noted situation created by O.P No.1 & 2 the complainant possessed no vehicle for around ten months though he had paid for the tractor and after several approached, the O.P No.1 provided an old vehicle with new tyres in the month of January 2019.It is further stated that , finding no other way the complainant accepted the said vehicle provided by O.P NO.1 but soon after receiving  of the vehicle it was found faulty. This matter was also intimated to the O.P No.1 & 2 who assured that, the vehicle is new one and if anything found faulty it shall be repaired by them, but they did not kept their promise. The complainant has suffered a lot for repair of the vehicle by paying money for the same which is in brake down condition for most of the time. It is further stated that, as both O.P No.1 and 2 have played foul with the complainant resulting financial and social loss, also he sustained heavy mental agony. It is further contended that ,  the O.P No.2 & 3 are levying repayment at monthly instalment to the complainant but, due to foul play and providing old &  faulty vehicle, the complainant is unable to run the tractor properly and also unable to pay the monthly instalment of said loan to the O.P No.2 and 3.However ,the complainant has deposited few instalment to the O.P No.2 compelled by the staff of O.P No.2 and 3 .It is further lleged that , the O.P No.1 has supplied a copy of Registration Certificate of said vehicle which has been registered as OD 08 K 5122 dated 15.02.2019 in the name of complainant though  the complainant had paid money for the tractor in the month of June 2017 . If the tractor which has been provided by O.P No.1 is genuine one then O.P No.4 also liable for repairing of  the faulty vehicle and the vehicle must be replaced by a new vehicle. . Now the O.P No.1 is not listening the request of the complainant for replacing of new vehicle free from defect by taking back of said old defective vehicle earlier supplied to the complainant rather O.P No.2 is threatening to repossess the subject vehicle form complainant causing harassment financial crises & mental agony which cannot be compensate in any manner.Hence t6his complaint .
4. The , complainant, to substantiate his contention, has  relied on the following documents and filed the true copy of the same along with his complaint petition :-

1. Two numbers of advance slips, money receipt issued by O.P No.1 vide SL NO.654 dt.29.06.2017, SL No.677 dt.04.09.2017.
2. Copy of the  Registration certificate vide Regd. No. OD 08 K 5122
3. Five numbers of  instalment payment receipt issued by O.P No.2

5. Upon Notice, the O.Ps have  neither appeared before the Commission  nor filed their  written version in spite of several adjournments granted by this Commission as such the case is heard ex-party from the Complainant  in absence of the Opposite Party and  proceeded to dispose of the case, on  merit.
6.  The complainant led his evidence by way of affidavit. The facts stated in the affidavit evidence of the complainant is corroborating with the averment of complaint petition. Perused the complaint petition and the document filed by the complainant.
7. Before discussing other issues as to whether there is any negligence, deficiency in service and  unfair trade practice on the part of OPs as alleged by the complainant, we would like to decide the maintainability of this complaint first.
8. Section 2(7) of C.P.Act define “Consumer “ as follows:-“  "consumer" means any person who:—

1. 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; or
2. hires or avails of any service 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 beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose.

Explanation. -For the purposes of this clause, -

 (a) the expression "commercial purpose " does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood, by means of self-employment;

(b) the expressions "buys any goods " and "hires or avails any services " includes offline or online transactions through electronic means or by teleshopping or direct selling or multi-level marketing;

10.  Here in this case, the true Copy of Registration certificate vide Regd No..OD 08 K 5122 placed on record clearly shows that, the subject vehicle is a commercial one.  

11. No cogent evidence placed on record that, the complainant has   purchased the subject  commercial vehicle   and using  the same by him exclusively for the purpose of earning of his livelihood, by means of self-employment as such we are of the opinion that,  the complainant is not a consumer as defined under the C.P.Act 2019 for which this  complaint is not maintainable before Commission rather  liable to be dismissed.

11.  Based on the above said discussion this complaint is dismissed ex-party against the Ops as not maintainable under C.P. Act within the jurisdiction of this Commission.  However,  no order as to cost.  The complainant may take shelter of the proper court of law. Complaint is disposed of accordingly.

Dictated and corrected by me.

       Sd/-    

President

 I   agree.

  Sd/-     

Member

 Pronounced in the open Commission today on this   11^th  day of October 2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission. Pending application if any is also stands disposed off. In want of quorum this complaint could not be disposed off in time.

Free copy of this order be supplied to the parties for their perusal or party may download the same from the Confonet be treated as copy served to them .The judgment be uploaded forth with on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.  Ordered  accordingly.