AMIT JAISWAL Vs. DEALERS STAR AUTOMOBILE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COMPLAINT case No. 155/07, of the appellant herein has been dismissed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Korea -Baikunthpur (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short), vide order dated 9.11.2009, observing that the vehicle was purchased for commercial purpose and therefore the complainant does not come in the category of 'consumer'. Feeling aggrieved by the order of dismissal of complaint, this appeal has been filed.

(2.) FACTS of the case, as per the complaint, were that the complainant purchased a Max Pickup vehicle from respondent No. 1, with the help of finance provided by the respondent for the purpose of delivery of goods. The allegation is that the respondent malafidely handed over a vehicle which was having manufacturing defects. Chassis of the vehicle cracked within a year from the date of purchase and the vehicle has become un -useful thereafter. There was a warranty of three years or up to 1800 kms. running, but the vehicle was not repaired by respondents, though intimation was given on phone as well as on personal visit and thus deficiency in service has been committed by respondents. It has also been claimed that the vehicle is in stationary condition from November, 2006 and complainant has suffered loss of Rs. 7,46,000 and this amount has been claimed by the complainant as compensation from respondents.

(3.) THE facts of the complaint were resisted by respondents in their written version and the allegation was denied that a defective vehicle was given by respondents or that the chassis of the vehicle was cracked within a year from the date of purchase. This defence has, been taken that on account of overloading, there may be some crack in the chassis, but it was not a manufacturing defect. District Forum in the impugned order has held that the vehicle was purchased for commercial purpose and so the complaint was not maintainable, as the complainant is not a 'consumer'.