This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

          Today is fixed for passing final order in respect of the maintainability petition as filed by the OP6 challenging the status of the complainant as consumer in view of the fact that complainant is a Private Ltd. Company and that application was filed by the OP6 Bank of Baroda on 02-12-2013.

          Against that objection complainant filed written objection and submitted that the present complaint has filed by the complainant it is not really any commercial transaction and a private company is a juristic person so it has his liability to ventilate his grievance before the Forum and Bank Authority does not render any service and it is further submitted that from the written version of the OP it is clear that OP was negligent in accepting interpolated cheque and by clearing such an interpolated cheque though it is palpably proved form the document of the OP that the OP Bank did not render due diligence and thereby cleared such fraudulent cheque and withdraw huge amount of the complainant account so the present complaint is maintainable and complainant is a consumer.

          Practically, after considering the entire complaint it is found that complainant is T.S. Foundry Equipment (P) Ltd. and Bodhisatwa Banerji is the director of the Company and that Company issued two cheques before landlords Subhadra Chatterjee and Ava Chatterjee for monthly rent through post and it is the allegation of the complainant that this cheques were subsequently by coercion and fraud collected by third person and thereafter cheque was defaced and amount was erased and huge amount was included therefore those cheues were submitted to UCO Bank Authority and Bank Authority cleared it and which was subsequently deducted from the complainant’s account and for which complainant filed this case about negligence and deficient manner observed on the part of the OP.

          No doubt apparently the written version of the OP, the conduct of the postal authority supports prima facie that postal authority peon who delivered those letters to some miscreants with whom the postal authority staff had good relation and that miscreants managed to receive those cheques which was in the postal envelope and same were delivered by postal authority.  Thereafter it was manipulated by those miscreants.  Thereafter they purchased bank authorities and managed to encash the cheques for paying the huge amount.  Bank has not able to deny that fact but only to discharge their liability they have come before this Foru7m to say that complainant is not a consumer because it is a private limited company and no doubt complainant is a private limited company and fact remains the transaction was related to Company affairs because the two rooms for which the said two cheques were sent were for monthly rend by said two rooms which were being used by the Company for their business purpose and rent are being paid from the income of the said business and of series of account after profit and loss of the company and the said two rooms are maintainable from the account of the company so no doubt rooms which were being used by the complainant are used for the purpose of commercial purpose and so, the rent as paid by the company to the owners also for commercial purpose.

          Admitted position is that only in respect of insurance claim company can be a consumer but otherwise all private limited companies are deprived from filing any complaint as consumer in view of the fact the status of the complainant is a private limited company but not a domestic institution or it is the transaction for domestic purpose and for which we are convinced to hold that the present complainant T.S. Foundry Equipment (P) Ltd. cannot be a consumer in the present complaint and so the complaint, filed by the private limited company, the present complainant is not maintainable in view of the fact the present Pvt. Ltd. Company (Complainant) is not consumer in the eye of law.

          In the result, the objection as filed by the OP6 bears merit in the eye of law.

Hence,

Ordered

That the Complaint is dismissed as same is not maintainable in view of the fact the complainant T.S. Foundry Equipment (P) Ltd. Is not a consumer in the eye of law as the entire transaction is completely commercial.