Complainant/appellant entered into a contract with the respondent opposite party, in terms of which the respondent allowed him to ply the bus on national route on paying Rs.1,000/- per day and any earning above Rs.1,000/- was to be kept by the appellant.  Appellant file the complaint alleging that he could not pay the instalments to the financier as a result of which the financier seized the vehicle because the opposite parties did not make the payments in time.

           State Commission dismissed the complaint observing that the appellant had not raised any consumer dispute and the dispute was with regard to plying of the vehicle on the national route; that for such a dispute, complaint was not maintainable.

           We agree with the view taken by the State Commission that the dispute raised by the Petitioner was not a consumer dispute.  Dismissed.

                 Liberty is reserved with the appellant to seek relief of his grievance from any other appropriate Forum along with an application under Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act for condoning the delay for the time spent before the consumer fora, keeping in mind the observations made by the Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works vs.PSG Industrial Institute – (1995) 3 SCC 583.