Today is fixed for admission hearing  of this case. Complainant Is personally present and heard the complainant.

Heard the complainant and also considered the complaint wherefrom it is found that complainant is a trading member with the O.P.  having a Client Code CHANDAST and it is also admitted that  he has  been trading regularly in respect of various shares and securities online with O.P.  

Considering the above fact it is clear that complainant is trading regularly in the share business which is always commercial activity and under the circumstances the complainant cannot be treated as consumer as per the C. P. Act, 1986.

Moreover, complainant has not pleaded that it is the commercial transaction made for his livelihood though tries to say  as self-employment but there is no such version  that this commercial transaction is his only source of earning. Rather it is proved that he is a pension holder as ex-servicemen by profession and further admitted that he was interested to trade share and security online.

So, considering the above fact it is clear that complainant is engaged in such commercial trade related to speculative purchase and sell of shares and about its loss he is well aware and so as per C. P. Act, 1986 there is no such provision to entertain any such complaint to compensate for speculative transaction or loss

Contd. …. 2/-

-::: 2 :::-

In this regard we have relied upon the ruling reported in II(2002) CPJ 4 NC and also III (2006) CPJ 350 and after relying upon those ruling we are confirmed that consumer forum cannot entertain any such commercial  related to speculative transaction or loss and speculative purchase of an sell of shares and so there is no question of any sort of negligence or deficiency of service against the share broker and for which present complainant cannot claim deficiency of service because complainant has not hired the service of the O.P.

Further we have relied upon the ruling reported in II(2012) CPJ 181(NC) also and considering those judgements and further relying upon the ruling reported in 2010 CTJ 1198 and III 2007 CPJ 316 (NC) we are convinced that complainant is trading regularly in the sell and purchase of shares which completely speculative purchase and sell of shares and transaction where loss and profit of shares is also speculative. Then the motive behind such speculative trading is to earn profits and for which it is purely commercial one for which it is not covered under the provision C.P. Act, 1986

Thus we hold that the complainant is not consumer as per provision of the C. P. Act for which the present complaint  is not tenable in the eye of law as the complainant is not a consumer of the O.P.  and entire transaction is commercial in nature.

Hence,

Ordered

That the complaint be and the same is rejected on merit.