Judgements

Sidheswar Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. vs Kirloskar Electric Co. Ltd. And … on 30 May, 2002

National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Sidheswar Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. vs Kirloskar Electric Co. Ltd. And … on 30 May, 2002
Bench: D W Member, B Taimni


ORDER

J.K. Mehra, J. Member

1. In this Original Petition, the main allegation of the
Complainant is that it was not supplied a particular machine, i.e.
Kirloskar Make S.P.D.P. Wound Rotor A.C. 3 Horizontal Foot
Mounted 265 K.V./355 H.P. 1000 RPM, Frame T.R. 6 Qtr 1″. The
Complainant had also made a payment of Rs. 50,000/- as advance to
the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party could not deliver the machine
in time, as a result whereof, according to the Complainant, he had
incurred huge loses and claimed the following reliefs, by filing this
complaint before us:

(a) The complainant be allowed with costs.

(b) The opponent be directed to pay Rs. 28,33,000/- in one
lumpsum as compensation.

(c) Other just and equitable orders be passed.

2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. We
have also gone through the records of the case very carefully. In this
case there are allegations that the said machine was not supplied by
the Opposite Parties and the Complainant had to suffer a loss on
account of such breach of contract – sale of goods. We have already
held in several cases including Jaipur Metals & Electricals v. Lakshmi
Industries II 1999 CPJ 602 that goods purely for resale and supply of
goods will nt be in the nature of deficiency of service and the sale
being purely for commercial use and not by one person for self-employment
to earn his livelihood. The Complainant is a Company and
so is the Opposite Party. Any such contracts will not come within the
purview of the Consumer dispute nor is the Complainant qualified to be
a consumer. if there is any difficulty as to limitation, it will be open to the
Complainant to move the civil Court under Section 14 of the Limitation Act,
1963 for exclusion of time spent in the present proceedings. In this
connection a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Laxmi
Engineering Works v. PSG Industrial Institute
– (1995) 3 SCC 583.

3. In the light of the above discussion, this original petition is
dismissed with costs assessed at Rs. 5,000/-, without prejudice to the
rights of the Complainant to approach the civil court or any other forum
as he may be advised.