SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

A.S.VIJAYAKAR, Y.KRISHAN, V.BALAKRISHNA ERADI, RAIS AHMED
SYNCO TEXTILES PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
GREAVES COTTON & COMPANY LTD. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Mr. T.R. Bhandari, (In person)
For the Respondent:Mr. B.L. Sharma, Advocate

ORDER

Mr. Justice V. Balakrishna Eradi, President—This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the Order of the State Commission, Rajasthan dated September 16, 1989 dismissing his complaint-petition on the ground that the appellant is not a 'consumer' within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein after called ‘the Act’) inasmuch as the purchase of the goods in question had been made by him for a 'commercial purpose'.

2. The appellant company operates an oil mill to produce edible oils and oil cake from oil seeds. The plant and machinery in his factory are used for conversion of raw materials into finished goods. On August 19, 1986, the appellant purchased from the respondent company three generating sets for a total cost of Rs. 5,53,000/-. The grievance put forward in the complaint is that the generating sets supplied by the respondent company were found to be defective, in that one of the engines had an undersized crank shaft and the rubber rings (gaskets) used in the three generating sets were of inferior quality, as a consequence of which water had entered into the engines. Since correspondence with the respondent company for replacement






















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

[No cases identified as bad law. None of the references indicate that any cited cases have been overruled, reversed, abrogated, or otherwise treated negatively as bad law.]

Rohit Chaudhary VS Vipul Ltd. - 2023 6 Supreme 317: Referenced as having "received the attention of the National Commission" in Synco Textiles Pvt. Ltd. vs. Greaves Cotton and Company Ltd., and "approved by this Court in Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta." The language "approved" explicitly indicates positive judicial treatment.

Vinit Bahri VS MGF Developers Ltd. - 2026 0 Supreme(SC) 124: States "This Court in Laxmi Engineering Works (supra) approved the view taken by the NCDRC in Synco Textiles Pvt. Ltd." The language "approved" explicitly indicates positive judicial treatment.

[No cases in this category. No explicit language such as "followed" appears.]

[No cases in this category. No language indicating distinction, criticism, or questioning appears.]

[None. All references contain clear positive treatment indicators via "approved," with no ambiguous language.]

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top