Orissa

Bargarh

CC/15/36

Mrs. Sangeeta Agrawal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri. Dinesh Patidar, M.D. - Opp.Party(s)

J.Sahu

08 Jul 2015

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/15/36
 
1. Mrs. Sangeeta Agrawal
resident 9/A Saraswati Vihar Ward No.1, P.O./P.S./District. Bargarh (Odisha)
Bargarh
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Sri. Dinesh Patidar, M.D.
Regd. Office of Works, Plot No..401 Sec.3 Pithampur PIN. 454774 Dist. Dhar (M.P.).
Dhar
Madhyapradesh
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE Miss. Raj Laxmi Pattanaik PRESIDENT
 HONORABLE Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash Member
 
For the Complainant:J.Sahu, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

 

Date of filing:- 09/06/2015

Date of Order:- 08/07/2015

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOURM (COURT)

B A R G A R H.

 

Consumer Complaint No. 36 of 2015.

Mrs. Sangeeta Agrawal W/o. Ashish Kumar Agrawal, Resident 9/A Saraswati Vihar Ward No.1, P.o/P.s./Dist. Bargarh (Odisha). Prop. M/S. Dikshya Sai Enterprises. ..... ..... ..... Complainant.

  • V e r s u s -

Sri Dinesh Patidar, M.D. M/s. Shaktipumps (I) Ltd, Regd. Office of Works, Plot No.401 Sec.3 Pithampur, PIN. 454774, Dist. Dhar (M.P.) ..... ..... ..... Opposite Party.

ORDER PASSED BY THE DISTRCIT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (COURT), BARGARH ON Dt.08/07/2015

Dt.08/07/2015.

The case is posted today for order on the Admission hearing.

On Dt.22/06/2015, Heard the matter and perused the documents available in the case record.

The Complainant in her petition submitted that she is doing business under the name and style of M/s. Dikshya Sai Enterprises, Bargarh and Opposite Party is the firm Producing Pumps and sales the products through agents in different areas. On the request of Mr.Sisir Biswal, Area Sales Manager of O.P., and after being appraised by the A.S.M. and knowing about the products and expected marketability of the products agreed and deposited some cheques to take agency. But due to irregularities and in consistency in the dealing, the Complainant did not want the business through agency of the firm.

So from the foregoing discussions and from the petition and accompanying documents, it is seen that between the Complainant and O.P. there is a Commercial Transaction and the Complainant purchased the products for using for Commercial purpose.

 

Since the purchase was for a Commercial Purpose, the Complainant can not be regarded as a consumer, falling with the definition of the said expression contained in Sec-2(1)(d)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act-1986 and she can not be a consumer and the present consumer case is not maintainable a per the provision of Consumer Protection Act.

Case is dismissed as it is not Maintainable.

Case is disposed off accordingly.

 

                                   Sd/-                                                          Sd/-

                 (Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash)                         (Miss Rajlaxmi Pattnayak)

                           M e m b e r.                                              P r e s i d e n t.

 

 

 

 

 
 
[HONORABLE Miss. Raj Laxmi Pattanaik]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONORABLE Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.