Orissa

Rayagada

CC/85/2017

Sri Biswaranjan Jena - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Ranjay Kumar Jhalia - Opp.Party(s)

R.K Sanapati

03 Aug 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 85/ 2017.                                          Date.    03.08.2017.

P R E S E N T .

Sri GadadharaSahu, B.Sc.                                           President I/C.

Smt. Padmalaya Mishra, LL.B.                                     Member

 

Sri Biswaranjan Jena, S/O: Hrudananda Jena, At/Po: Kothapetta, PS:   Chandili, Dist.Rayagada,State:  Odisha.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     …….Complainant

Vrs.

1. Sri Ranjay Kumar Jhalia, S/O: Late Mokoro Jhalia, Vill: Jagannathpur, PS:K.Singhpur,  Dist: Rayagada. And 5 others.

                                                              .…..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:                                 

For the complainant: - Sri  R. K. Senapati, Advocate, Rayagada.

                                               

                                                J u d g e m e n t.

          The  present disputes arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps for non refund of invoice amount a sum of Rs. 1,54,680/- and damages.

 

                The case is put up  to day for hearing on admission after office check. 

            Heard. Perused the petition filed by the learned counsel for the complainant.

            The principal question that arises for our determination before going to the merits of the case  whether the complainant is a consumer within the definition of Section 2(i)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act?  It is  held and reported in C.P.R.- 2002 (3) page No. 197 where in the hon’ble National Commission observed “Supply of goods purely for resale will not be in nature of deficiency in service and sale being for commercial  purpose- Complainant would not be a consumer”. Further another citation reported in 2011 Supreme Appeal  Reporter (Civil) page No. 126 where in the Hon’ble Supreme Court  observed “Goods have been purchased for commercial purpose, the complaint itself was not maintainable”.

            On perusal of the complaint petition  and on relying the citations of the  Hon’ble Apex Court it reflects that the complainant is not a consumer  coming under the purview of the C.P. Act. On perusal  of the petition  it is  revealed  that the complainant is a  merchant and selling the goods  purchased from the  O.P. No.2 and that  goods purely for  resale  and the  sale being purely for commercial purpose. The grievance which was made by the complainant with regard to  refund value of  amount, and damages does not comes under the purview of the C.P. Act, 1986 since the transaction has dealt with commercial  business.

           

  This forum has lack of jurisdiction to entertain the  above dispute  and adjudicate  the same under the provisions  of the C.P. Act, 1986.  The case is not maintainable in view of the above discussion.

The grievance of the complainant can be raised  before the appropriate court of law and not before this forum. We  do not  think  proper to go  into merit of this case.

Hence, the claim of the   complainant can not be accepted under the provisions of the C.P. Act. It is open to  complainant   ordinary remedy to approach proper forum.       

So  to meet the  ends of justice    the following order is passed.

ORDER.

            In the result with these observations, findings, discussion  the complainant  is free to approach the court of competent  having  its jurisdiction.   Parties are left to bear their own cost.  Accordingly the case  is closed.

Dictated and corrected by me

Pronounced on this     3^rd    Day of   August,  2017.

 

 

 

                                                                Member.                                                              President