COMPAGE COMPUTERS PVT. LTD Vs. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard the learned counsel for the complainant, and having perused the record, we are of the opinion that this Commission cannot take cognizance of the complaint, in view of the fact that the complainant is a private limited company seeking loss of profits, loss of reputation, loss of interest on the amount held as security, loss of interest on held up capital of Rs. 6,90,92,000/-, and Rs. 5 lakhs towards mental agony and sufferance in all Rs. 60 lakhs against the opposite party bank on the ground that the services it had agreed to provide were not provided.

(2.) When a query was raised as to how the complaint is maintainable in view of the fact that the services availed are for commercial purpose and the exclusion clause does not in any way comes to the rescue of the complainant, in the sense that the complainant a private limited company could not have availed the services exclusively for the purpose of earning livelihood by means of self-employment.

(3.) Recently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Birla Technologies Ltd. Versus Neutral Glass and Allied Industries Ltd. reported in CDJ 2010 SC-1177 observed that purchasing of goods or availing services for commercial purpose would not attract the definition of 'consumer' in the light of Section 2(1)(d)(i. or 2(1)(d)(ii). For benefit we excerpt the passage from the said decision in order to impress that Section 2(1)(d. attracts both purchasing of goods as well as availing of services. Their Lordships' opined :