WIMCO LTD. Vs. ASHOK SEKHON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a miscellaneous application filed by the applicant for reviewing our order dated 30.1.08 passed in FA No.129 of 2000.

(2.) The grounds advanced for review of our order relate to the factum that what the petitioner was pleading was deficiency in service and not any sale or purchase of goods, respondent being consumer or not, and misunderstanding of facts by this Commission as also the fact that the complainant is a poor farmer, hence engaged in growing of plants for earning of his livelihood as also the illegality of the order.

(3.) Having heard the Learned Counsel for the review applicant and perusing the impugned order, we find that in view of provision of Section 22 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, this Commission can review its order in the case of ˜error apparent on the face of record. Nothing to this effect has been shown that there is any ˜error apparent on the face of record in the order passed by us. The basis of challenge is the merits of the case, vis -a -vis, hiring of services and not purchase of goods, the respondent not being a consumer, which are questions of law and they have been adequately dealt with in the order passed by us, which will not fall within the purview of the powers conferred to review our order under Section 22 of the Consumer Protection Act, in view of which, we find no merit in this miscellaneous application, hence dismissed. Review dismissed.