CC No.           8/2024

Date:-             07.02.2024

Present:-        Complainant in Person

He files the present complaint case stating that he purchased a Refrigerator from the OP on 27.04.2019 for an amount of Rs. 30,700/- including tax and this Refrigerator was working properly but 03.10.2023 he notice that the Refrigerator has developed some crack whereafter he made a complaint to the OP and some technician was sent by the OP who informed, after inspecting the Refrigerator that crack in the Refrigerator is beyond repair and he also informed the complainant that the manufacturer will pay back depreciated value on pre-tax invoice price and even one person Mr. Sher Singh telephoned him,  thereby asking the ID proof , copy of purchase bill and cancelled cheque so that demand draft in favour of complainant be made which was complied with by the complainant, and on first week of November 2023 the official of OP came to their house with demand draft of Rs.9000/- and asked the complainant to show defective Refrigerator whereafter he told that since the Refrigerator was defective and since that he already has purchased a new Refrigerator and therefore he is not having the old Refrigerator with him now and then the OP refused to give DD stating that DD cannot be given to complainant without seeing the Refrigerator, which amounts to deficiency in service and he has filed the present complaint case interalia praying that the OP be directed to compensate the complainant for selling defective Refrigerator to him. Complainant has argued the matter on his own. When the Commission enquired as to whether he has the Refrigerator in question with him, he submitted that he has already sold the said Refrigerator to some Kabadiwala & when it was enquired as to whether he can bring the Refrigerator back for the purpose of inspection of the OP, he informed that it cannot be traced-out. Law is well settled if the product against which the deficiency is being claimed has been sold out by the complainant the complainant, would be no more be covered within the definition of ‘Consumer’ under the Consumer Protection Act.

In the judgment of Tata Motors Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Hazoor Maharaj Baba Des Raj & Anr it was interalia held:

In the light of above observations, we find that as complainant did not remain consumer after sale of vehicle and he has sold the vehicle without permission of the District Forum and has suppressed this fact and has not approached the courts with clean hands, complaint is liable to be dismissed.

Since the Refrigerator has been sold out, the complainant therefore is no more a ‘consumer’ as per the Consumer Protection Act 2019 & therefore the complaint of the complainant before Consumer Commission is not maintainable. The same is dismissed.

File be consigned to record room.