REETA RANI Vs. METRO MOTORS PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claim of the appellant (complainant) was rejected on the ground that he had purchased vehicle for commercial purpose and thus it does not come within the meaning of consumer dispute and relied upon N. Akmalkhan V/s. Hindustan Motors Ltd. and Ors., 2004 2 CPJ 612, wherein the Tamilnadu State Commission observed that "where commercial purpose is involved that is not a consumer dispute. "

(2.) It is not disputed that the appellant (complainant) had purchased a vehicle make Tata 207/31 DI x CLB bearing Chassis No.374435 HCZ 928708, Engine No.497 sp 27 HVZ 916333 for a sum of Rs.3,67,082 from the respondent No.2 on 22.9.2004. The said vehicle was under warranty for 18 months. However, after one month of its purchase the vehicle developed some defect of low pulling power. The appellant approached the respondents for rectifying the defects or to return the money of the price of the truck along with interest @ 18% per annum, to pay Rs.50,000 as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs.5,500 as litigation expenses.

(3.) The claim of the appellant (complainant) was resisted on the ground of maintainability and jurisdiction. After relying upon the authorities detailed in the impugned order, the claim of the appellant (complainant) was rejected. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the District Forum, the appellant (complainant) has come up in appeal.