KRISONS ELECTRONICS SYSTEMS LTD. vs D.V.PALANKAR

THIS appeal, by O.P. No. 1 is directed against the order dated 30.7.1993, passed by the District Forum, Karwar, in complaint No. 18/93, directing both the opposite parlies jointly and severally to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 25,700/-with interest thereon at 12% p.a. The facts, briefly stated, are as follows : 1. The complainant a businessman, dealing in TV, VCR, and other electrical equipments, placed an order for supply of two VCPs with O.P. No. 1 - the appellant herein - and made payment of a sum of Rs. 25,700/-to O.P. No. 1. O.P. No. 1 sent two VCPs to the complainant through O.P. No. 2 - a transporter.

IT is the case of the complainant that O.P. No. 2 delivered only one VCP and that too was damaged and did not deliver the other VCP. The complainant made demands with O.P. Nos. 1 and 2 either to give two VCPs or refund the amount of Rs. 25,700/-with interest thereon. When the opposite parties did not comply with this request of the complainant, the complainant filed the complaint seeking refund of the said amount of Rs. 25,700/-with interest thereon from both the opposite parties. O.P. No. 1 filed his version and admitted the fact that the complainant had made payment of a sum of Rs. 25,700/-towards the value of 2 VCPs but he averred that in accordance with the said order placed by the complainant he sent two VCPs through the transporter, O.P. No. 2 and so he was not liable to make any refund of the said amount of the complainant. O.P. No. 2 did not appear nor filed any version.

During enquiry the complainant and O.P. No. 1 filed their affidavits in evidence. The complainant produced certain xerox copies of the documents. The District Forum on consideration of this material, held that both the opposite parties were liable to refund the said amount of Rs. 25,700/-to the complainant with interest thereon.

WE have called for the records and received. WE have also perused the material on record. The averments, at para 1 of the complaint, read, thus : "1. The petitioner being the proprietor of Mithun Enterprises, running his business in Shop No. 4, Hindu School Shopping Complex, Karwar by purchasing TV. VCR and other electrical equipments."

This would clearly go to show that the complainant is a dealer in electrical equipments who purchases the electrical equipments and makes sale of them.

IN the course of his business, he had purchased two VCPs from O.P. No. 1. It is the grievance of the complainant that one VCP that was supplied was damaged one and the second VCP was not at all supplied. So the complainant had sought refund of the said amount of Rs. 25,700/-from both the opposite parties. O.P. No. 2 is a transporter. Having regard to these facts and in the circumstances of the case it is clear that the purchase of VCPs made by the complainant from O.P. No. 1 was admittedly for re-sale. Having regard to these facts, it is clear that the complainant cannot be classified as a ''consumer'' under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as it is clear that the purchase of the goods by the complainant was for re-sale and for commercial purpose. In view of this fact, we are constrained to hold that the complainant cannot be classified as a ''consumer'' under the provisions of Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act. The District Forum did not consider this material aspect of the matter and, therefore, the finding recorded by the District Forum, is erroneous and unsustainable. ORDER In the result, therefore, this appeal is allowed. The order dated 30.7.1993, recorded by the District Forum, Karwar/-in complaint No. 18/93 is set aside. The complaint of the complainant is dismissed. The parties are directed to pay and bear their own costs. Appeal allowed. ____________