Order No. 3                             Dated: 30.04.2024

Today is fixed for admission hearing.

Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present. Heard on admissibility of the complaint petition.  Considered.

On perusal of the complaint petition it appears that the complainant has filed the instant complaint U/S 35 of the CP Act, 1986 and the complainant is a Company of bolt and nut manufacturing unit under the name and style Sharma Trading Co., residing at Bonder Bill Delhi Road Bridge, Dankuni, Hooghly, Pin-712311 applied for a LAP business at a tune of Rs.38,31,332/- and the said loan was full secured loan by mortgaging of original property Deeds and on 05.11.2023 a tele caller from Tata Capital called the petitioner for a loan against property and gave the petitioner contact number of one Krishna Tiwary for completing all  necessary relevant by them against taking two original Deeds and the complainant has to be paid Rs.3,54,000/- as advance for purchase of machine i.e. 10% of said machine cost and by cash payment of Rs.2,00,000/- for the machine advance to M/S Dinesh Steel, Ludhiana, Punjab and in furtherance, the complainant was directed to close all other loan A/c which was running and the complainant made foreclosure hearing at Bandhan Bank, IDFC First Bank, Tata Capital Finance, Bajaj Fin Serve at a tune of Rs.12,00,000/- which was done as per the agreement for disbursement of the said loan dated 27.11.2023.  Prayer of the complainant is for passing an order directing the OP for refund of invested amount as per their direction of sanction letter and and with disbursement letter along with a direction to the OP to pay damage cost by the OPs due to rejection of the loan.

In view of the above discussion it transpires that the complainant applied for loan for a LAP business and there is no whisper in the four corner of the Consumer Complaint that the complainant is carrying the concern for livelihood.  Moreover, complainant has to be paid Rs.3,54,000/- for purchase of machine as advance to M/S Dinesh Steel, Ludhiana, Punjab for the said loan and said advance was made on condition that if the entire cost for machine advance is not paid within 60 days, the said money will be forfeited by the said Co. and the aforesaid M/S Dinesh Steel, Ludhiana, Punjab has not been made party in the instant consumer complaint.

Based on the above observation, we are of the view that the transaction involved in this complaint is for commercial purpose and the said matter does not come within ambit of the CP Act, 2019 and more so, complainant has filed the case U/S 35 of the CP Act, 1986 which has already been repealed and hence, we are not inclined to admit the instant complaint and rejected accordingly.