(1.) -IN this consumer complaint, we sought a response from the opposite parties regarding the admissibility of the consumer complaint under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Having heard Sh. Surendra Singh Rana, proprietor of the complainant proprietorship firm and the learned Counsel for the opposite parties, we are of the considered view that the dispute raised is not a consumer dispute and, therefore, the complaint cannot legally be admitted for decision on merits, for the reasons to follow.
(2.) IN the consumer complaint, following reliefs have been claimed:
(3.) AVERMENTS of the complaint make it abundantly clear that the complainant had been supplying calcium chloride (Technical and CP grade) to the opposite parties. The price of the product supplied from the year 1989 to 1990, has not been paid. These averments and the reliefs claimed, clearly indicate that the claim pertains to the price of the goods supplied and per se, the complainant do not fall under the category of "consumer" as defined under Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act.