- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 26.2.2010 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter referred for short as "District Forum") in Complaint Case No. 129/2009, whereby the complaint of the appellant herein was dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated facts of the case, as per averments in the complaint, are that the complainant is a partnership firm, income of which is the source of livelihood of its partners. It had entered into an agreement with OP on 17.9.2008 for purchase of a boiler. Boiler was sent by OP as per invoice No. 442 dated 3.11.2007 which was installed in its rice mill on 20/21.11.2007. Complainant alleged some defects in the said boiler, as mentioned, such as total weight of the boiler was 15.51 metric ton instead of 16.90 metric ton (dry weight) including packing material. Noperformance test was done till the date of complaint. I.B.R. fitting was of inferior quality of cast iron as against promise of Q.L.S. quality. Fuel consumption was more. Operation manual and Log Book was not provided, the boiler was not of prescribed standard. Mobery valve certificate and pipe band of safety valve was not provided. Complainant further averred that despite writing several letters and also a registered notice on 16.6.2008, OP did not care to redress the aforesaid defects and sent only an unsigned letter dated 3.3.2008 to it. Complainant averred to have sustained loss because of the said defective boiler, therefore, filed complaint before the District Forum praying for compensation from OP of Rs. 14,78,050 towards cost of boiler, Rs. 1,10,853 towards interest and Rs. 3,15,000 towards consequential loss in income.
(3.) OP , while resisting the complaint denied averments of the complainant and averred that the complaint being related to a purely commercial transaction does not come within the ambit of consumer dispute. The complainant is a partnership firm which had purchased the boiler for commercial purpose. The weight of the boiler was mentioned as approximate weight and it was not a standard scope of supply. The complainant filed the complaint much after the expiry of warranty period. OP averred that it had supplied the boiler to the complainant in accordance with the standards and norms fixed by the Government in terms of Indian Boiler Regulation Act as such if had not committed any deficiency in service, so the complaint of the complainant was liable to be dismissed. Learned District Forum,havingperused the documents produced before it and heard arguments of both the parties, dismissed the complaint.;