SHYAM COMPUTER SYSTEMS (P) LTD. vs PREM KUMARI SEHGAL

THIS is an appeal by the defendant against the order of the District Forum dated 18.4.90, directing the defendant to supply to the complainant some parts of the computer within a fortnight.

BRIEFLY, the facts are that the complainant is carrying on the business under the name and style of P. Sehgal Insurance & Security Center, First Floor, 102, Mohan Complex, H. block, Shopping Centre, Ashok Vihar Phase-I, Delhi-1100 23. The defendant Shyam Computer Systems (P) Ltd., C-138, Naraina Industrial Area Phase-I, New Delhi-110023 is dealing in Computers. It is pleaded that the complainant placed an order for supply of personal computer system model Shyam P.C/XT, key board printer, programme and its installation etc. etc. and the defendant agreed to supply the same. The defendant installed the computer but did not supply P.C. XT alongwith software and manuals as agreed. It is consequently, prayed that the defendant be directed to give the aforesaid items.

No one appeared on behalf of the defendant. Consequently, an ex-parte order was passed against the defendant directing it to supply the said parts. The defendant has come up in appeal against the order of the District Forum to this Commission.

THE learned Counsel for the appellant has argued that the computer was purchased by the defendant for commercial purposes and therefore, the Forum had no jurisdiction to try the complaint. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and given our thoughtful consideration to their arguments. From the complaint it is clear that the complainant is carrying on business. It is further evident from her letter dated the 6th February, 1989, written to the defendant that the computer was purchased for the purpose of business. It is relevant to point-out that she in that letter claimed that she had suffered loss for not supplying some of the parts of the computer. She could not allege to have suffered loss if the computer was not to be used for the purpose of business. Word ''consumer'' has been defined in Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter referred to as Act), as the person who buys any goods for the consideration but does not include the person who obtains such goods for re-sale or for any commercial purpose.

1n THE present case as already mentioned above, THE computer was purchased by THE complainant for THE purpose of her business. In THEse circumstances, she does not fall within THE definition of word ''consumer'' and as such she could not file THE complaint before THE District Forum. She can seek her remedy in ordinary Civil Court, if so advised. In THE aforesaid view, we are fortified by our observations in Travels & Trades Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi v. Swaraj Mazada Ltd & OTHErs (C-97/90) decided on 9.11.90. I (1991) CPJ 681. For THE aforesaid reasons, we accept THE appeal and direct THE District Forum to return THE complaint for presentation to THE proper Court. In THE circumstances of THE case, we however, make no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.