Mr. Justice A.L. Bahri, President—This appeal deserves to be allowed on the short ground that the complainant, M/s. Nankana Sahib Transport Company could not be held to be consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act to claim compensation in respect of chassis purchased from the opposite parties, which is of 1994 Model and was stated to be of 1995 Model. After purchase of the chassis, the complainant got a body of bus constructed thereon and it was at the time of registration of the bus with the Transport Authorities that it came to light that the vehicle was of 1994 Model although in die Invoice, it was stated to be of 1995 Model. Thus, the complainant claimed compensation in the complaint filed before the District Forum against the dealer - opposite party No. 1 and manufacturer - opposite party No. 2. After inviting version of the opposite parties and the evidence, the District Forum allowed the complaint on July 1, 1996 giving direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 48,694.80 to the complainant within a period of three months from the receipt of this order and the aforesaid order has been challenged by the opposite parties in this appeal.

2. The compla