Heard the complainant counsel on admissibility.

ORDER

     The complainant has filed this complaint against opposite party Nos.1 and 2 praying to grant reliefs as prayed in prayer column contending that the complainant is the owner of small pooja articles shop which he uses to earn his only source of livelihood, the opposite party is a business concern involved in the courier services of large shipment across India.  The complainant wanted to sell earthen lamps made of cow dung during Deepavali and booked earthen lamps made of cow dung with opposite party to deliver the same and made payment of Rs.40,000/- through online and it is further contended that the items ordered by complainant was supposed to deliver on or before 16.11.2020, but same were not delivered on time and delivered the same on 26.12.2020 and opposite party refused to stamp the delivery receipt and thereby causing huge loss to complainant business which is main source of his livelihood.  Therefore the complainant was forced to bear loss and store them by paying rent of Rs.10,000/- per month and he was unsure that said items will survive next till Deepavali for sale.  Therefore, this complaint.

     From the plain reading of the complaint averments it appears that the complainant ordered for supply of earthen lamps made of cow dung for supplying the same by opposite party for the purpose of business and to earn his livelihood.  At this juncture it is relevant to extract the definition of consumer means;

Consumer means any person who, (i) buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose;

     As per the definition of consumer any person who buys any goods for consideration for his use he becomes consumer.  But does not include a person obtain such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose such person will come under the purview of consumer.

     Whereas the complainant in his complaint has clearly contends that he is a small businessmen and running small pooja article shop which he uses to earn his source of livelihood and ordered for supply of earthen lamps made of cow dung with opposite party for supplying the same on payment of Rs.40,000/-, but the opposite party not supplied the same on time but supplied on 26.12.2020 and thereby caused loss  to business of the complainant.  So it is clear from the complaint averments that the complainant ordered for supply of earthen lamps made of cow dung with the opposite parties for reselling the same to the customers for earning is livelihood.  Therefore the complainant does not come under the purview of consumer.

     The complainant counsel has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India delivered in Civil Appeal No.9004-9005/2018 in case of Sunil Kohil and another V/s M/s Purearth Infrastructure Ltd., wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has observed that if the purchaser himself works on typewriter or plies the car as a taxi himself, he does not cease to be a consumer.  In other words, if the buyer of goods uses them himself i.e., by self-employment, for earning his livelihood, it would not be treated as a commercial purpose and further observed that manufacture and sale of bricks in a commercial way may also be to earn livelihood, but merely earning livelihood in commercial business, does not mean that it is not for commercial purpose.  From the above observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the aforecited respected judgment, it is crystal clear that if any person buys certain goods for resale for earning his livelihood which amounts to commercial business which does not fall under the definition of consumer.

     Therefore the aforecited ruling relied upon by the complainant has no application to the present set of facts of the case on hand.

     The averments made in the complaint clearly indicates that the complainant ordered for delivery of earthen lamps made of cow dung for supplying the same by opposite party for resale to earn his livelihood.  Therefore it is clear that the complainant is not a consumer, hence the complaint is not maintainable and it deserves to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself.  Hence, we pass the following order;

ORDER

The complaint of the complainant is dismissed as not maintainable.