JUDGMENT

Shri A.K.Patra,President

1. The captioned consumer complainant is filed by the   complainant named above inter alia alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for misleading advertisement and for non delivery of registration,  insurance & other  papers relating to  the purchased vehicle and for non delivery of  a Rotravetor as it was    promised to free deliver on purchased of said  tractor and trolley.
2. Complainant seeks for the following relief(s):- (i) to pass an order directing the OP No.1 either to furnish Service Manual, Registration Certificate, Insurance, Purchase Receipt of the vehicle, Rotravetor free of charge to the complainant or refund Rs.4,56,800/- + Rs.3,17,208/- + Interest and penalties levied  on loan to the complainant along with interest @ 12%  per annum from the date of delivery of vehicle, (ii) direct the OP No.2 and 3 to furnish the “No Dues Certificate”  to the Complainant and his remaining cheques to be handed over to the complainant after taking left installments from the complainant. Further, to direct the OP No.2 & 3 not to levy any undue interest and penalties on complainant as the very purpose of the  loan has already been frustrated due to the inaction of OP No.1, (ii) to direct the OP No.4 to look after the inaction of its own dealer and take necessary steps against his inaction, (iv) direct the OP No.1 to pay Rs.50,000/- to the complainant towards compensation, (v) to direct the Op No.1 to pay Rs.30,000/- to the complainant towards exemplary cost (vi) and to pass any other order as this Commission deems fit & proper in the interest of justice.
3. Brief facts as stated there in the complaint and emerged from the documents filed there with are that, the complainant being influenced by the promotional advertisement and offer of OP No.1 who furnished a quotation of Rs.7,54,000/- for tractor and trolley including  registration & insurance charges and with a promise of delivery of a Rotravetor along with purchase of a tractor & trolley. Being influenced upon said offer, the complainant agreed to purchase a tractor with trolley for commercial use to earn his livelihood. The OP 1 assisted the complainant  in obtaining loan at the branch office of OP No.2 and the complainant paid the down payment along with all the necessary documents  as demanded by OP No.2, accordingly, Rs.3,17,208/- was sanctioned towards loan on 15.09.2017 vide loan account No.14353700004497 and that, the loan amount was directly transferred to the OP No.1 , apart from that, as per the demand of OP No.1,  the complainant has paid Rs.4,56,800/- to the Op No.1 on 25.09.2017 and thereafter on 26.09.2017 the vehicle  was  delivered to the complainant but the OP No.1 did not give any Rotravetor nor any documents  of the purchased vehicle to the complainant The Op 1 taking advantage  of the innocence of the  complainant, assured the complainant  to give him the Rotravetor after two months  saying that,  he has ordered the same to the OP No.4 and also Op 1 assured that,  as the  vehicular paper needs to be submitted  to appropriate authority for registration and insurance, he will give the original documents along with the Service Books  after  registration & insurance is done and the complainant believing the OP No.1 took delivery of the vehicle but till date  neither registration or insurance is done  nor have  any service manual or Rotravetor  is  delivered  to the complainant for which the complainant could not be able use the vehicle.
4. It is further alleged by the complainant that, in the month of November 2018 he received a call from the OP No.3 that, his cheques received at the branch office of OP NO.2 shall be presented for encashment if he fails to close the loan.  The complainant has regularly paid the installment and has almost paid the entire loan amount but the Ops No.2 & 3 has imposed some fine amount which is beyond the endurance. Hence, this complaint.
5. On being notice, the Op 1 appeared through their Learned Counsel Shri Satyan Choudhury and filed their written version admitting the sale of the subject vehicle to the complaint .However, denied the complaint allegation on all its material particulars.
6. Preliminarily the OP 1 also raised objection on the maintainability of this complaint as the complainant has purchased the alleged vehicle for the commercial purpose accordingly he is not a consumer as defined under C.P.Act and that ,  the complaint is barred by limitation as prescribed under C.P. Act 2019  so also the complaint is not maintainable for non joinder & mis-joinder of  necessary party.
7. On merit it is admitted that, the OP 1 is authorized dealer of Sonalika International Tractor deals with sale of new “Sonalika Tractor” only. The complainant voluntarily expressed his desire to purchase a new “Sonalika DI 35 tractor” from the OP 1 and placed an order for   a trolley worth Rs.1,40,000/- only to R.K. Engineering Works. The Op No.1 never circulate any promotional advertisement  or offer for sale of tractor in any form of speaking , writing, print or viewing and also never assured to supply of Rotravetor free of cost on purchase of tractor & trolley . The alleged vehicle is being financed by OP 2 / Bank and that, the OP 1 has never claim any excess amount than the actual price of the vehicle including registration and insurance.
8. The Op 1 further submitted that, as the complainant was unable to pay the entire cost of the tractor & trolley, he availed a loan from the Op No.2 and entered into a lawful contract of Hypothecation. Accordingly the OP No.2 sanctioned loan to the complainant under Hypothecation Agreement. On dt.24.08.2017 the op no.1  received Rs.3,02,796/-from the financer/op 2  and  Rs.78,000/- was withhold by the OP 2 which  will be released in favour of the OP No.1 after issuing of Registration Certificate by the RTA, Kalahandi. In this connection an amount of Rs.9,204/- was paid towards processing fees, service charges and Swachha Bharat Sess.
9. It is further submitted by the Op No.1 that, the complainant has received  the Tractor & Trolley on its  date of delivery and thereafter the documents are processed and on 30.06.2017 the OP No.1 issued a Retail Invoice bearing No.RKT/218 dt.30.06.2017 in favour of the complainant  towards the cost of the tractor including VAT tax, cost of Registration and insurance. It is further contended that, at the time of issuing of the invoice the complainant admitted his inability to pay the amount to the OP No.1 towards the full cost of the tractors, registration fees & insurance charges and requested the OP NO.1 to process the document assuring to pay the rest amount towards cost of the tractor & trolley within six months. It is further submitted that, soon after delivery of the tractor & trolley , the OP No.1  insured the vehicle with Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. vide Policy No.600921723430001072  and insurance paper was handed over  to the complainant along with service manual  books. The OP No.1  has voluntarily paid the fees for registration and other tax of the vehicle as commercial purpose  to the RTA, Kalahandi on 18.10.2017 but till date the complainant has  not produced the tractor & trolley before the RTA, Kalahandi for inspection and only due to non production of the said vehicle before the RTA Kalahandi for inspection in time by the complainant in spite of repeated approach of OP 1 caused delay in  registration of the vehicle and that, there is no negligence, deficiency in service unfair trade part on the part of the Op 1(one) .
10. The OP 1  further stated that, the complainant has received the tractor, trolley, service manual and tools supplied by the manufacturer on dt.30.06.2017 and towards the token of sale the OP NO.1 has issued bills, “Sale Certificate” & ”Form-21” along with other relevant documents and the same is submitted before the RTA, Kalahandi for registration of tractor and trolley and after received of the tractor & trolley the complainant  never appeared before the  OP NO.1 in order to avoid rest payment cost price  towards said tractor & trolley but  this complaint is filed only to harass the Op No.1.There is no cause of action rather this complaint is filed with a frivolous & vexation plea liable to be dismissed with cost..
11. The OP 2 & 3 appeared through Learned Counsel  Shri B.K.Acharaya and  filed their  written version  admitting the fact of financing of the vehicle  and submitted that, the complainant has not repaid  the loan dues . It is further stated that, there is no allegation against the Op No.2 & 3 rather there is a dispute between the complainant with OP 1 & 4 for which complaint is liable to be dismissed against the OP 2 & 3. It is further contended that, the complainant has admitted the facts that , he has purchased the said vehicle for commercial purpose accordingly he is not a consumer under C.P.Act  for which   this complaint is not maintainable under C.P. Act  rather liable to be dismissed.
12. The OP 4 appeared through their Learned Counsel Shri S.K.Pattjoshi and  filed their written version denying the petition allegations on all its material particulars.
13. The OP 4 submits that, this complaint is bad for mis joinder of opposite party No. 4 for that, neither any relief has been claimed nor there is any cause of action exists to file the present complaint against the Op 4. It is further submitted that, as the complainant has not mentioned the details of the  tractor purchased such as engine number, chassis number, registration number, date of purchase and invoice details, hence OP 4 denied  that,  any tractor manufactured by OP 4  was purchased by the complainant. The tractor is admittedly purchased & used for commercial purpose to gain profits; hence the complainant is not a consumer. This Hon’ble Forum/Commission has got no territorial jurisdiction to try this complaint against the OP 4 as the OP 4 is neither working for gains within the jurisdiction of this Forum/Commission nor the OP 1 is agent of the OP 4 and that, there is  no privity of contract in between the OP 4 and the complainant.
14. It is further submitted that, OP 4 is not the manufacturer of any kind of trolley. The tractor was purchased in the year 2017 and no complaint was made to the OP No.4 in this regard.  There is no cause of action to file this complaint against the OP No.4 neither any claim has been made against it. The complaint is false and frivolous as such liable to be dismissed with cost.
15. The complainant as well as OP 1 led their evidence by way of affidavit as prescribed under C.P.Act 2019 .
16. The  facts stated in the affidavit evidence  of the complainant is corroborating with the averment of complaint petition so also, the facts stated in the affidavit evidence of OP 1 is corroborating with the averment of their written version. OP 2 ,3 & 4 lead no evidence as prescribed under C.P.Act.
17. Heard the Parties present. Perused the material available on record. We have our thoughtful consideration on the submission of the Learned Counsel for the parties present.
18. Before discussing other issues as to whether there is any negligence & deficiency in service, unfair trade practice on the part of OPs as alleged by the complainant, and whether the complainant is entitled for the relief(s) claimed we would like to decide the maintainability of this complaint .
19. Section 2(7) of C.P.Act 1986 as well as Section (2) (11) of C.P.Act 2019 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;

20. Here in this case there is no dispute that the complainant has purchased the subject vehicle from the OP 1 being finance by OP 2. The complainant has admitted the facts that, the vehicle has been purchased for commercial purpose to earn his livelihood but no cogent evidence is placed on record to hold that, the subject vehicle is bought and used by him exclusively for the purpose of earning 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 for which the complaint is not maintainable before this Commission under the C.P.Act. Hence, this complaint is liable to be dismissed.

21. Based on the above said discussion this complaint is dismissed on contest 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.

       President.

 I   agree

                    Member

           Pronounced in the open Commission today on this   4^th day of Octo

ber 2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission. Pending application if any is also stands disposed off.

            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.