Taking an insurance policy to cover the envisaged risk does not constitute a commercial purpose.

Mr. Justice K.K. Srivastava, President—The appellant/complainant has been non-suited by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (for short hereinafter to be referred as District Forum) vide impugned judgment and order dated 11.10.2004 passed in complaint case No. 215 of 2003 only on the ground that it took the policy of insurance from the respondent-National Insurance Company Limited (for short hereinafter to be referred as Insurance Company) for commercial purpose, which now by the amendment made in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short hereinafter to be referred as C.P. Act) has been taken out of the purview of the C.P. Act. The District Forum did not go into the merit of the case.

2. The position of law has now been settled by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short hereinafter to be referred as National Commission) in the case of “M/s. Harsolia Motors v. M/s. National Insurance Company Limited”, I (2005) CPJ 27 (NC)=First Appeal No. 159 of 2004 decided vide judgment and order dated 3.12.2004, wherein the Hon’ble National Commission has observed at internal page 18 of the order as under:

“Further, from the aforesaid discussion, it is apparent that even taking wide meaning of the words `for any commercial purpose’ it would mean that goods purchased or services hired should be used in any activity directly intended to generate profit. Profit is the main aim of commercial purpose. But, in a case where goods purchased or services hired in an activity which is not directly intended to generate profit, it would not be commercial purpose.

In this view of the matter, a person who takes insurance policy to cover the envisaged risk does not take the policy for commercial purpose. Policy is only for indemnification and actual loss. It is not intended to generate profit.”

3. In view of the law as settled by Hon’ble National Commission in the case of M/s. Harsolia Motors (supra), the view taken by the District Forum to the contrary and dismissing the complaint on the ground that the insurance policy taken for a commercial purpose is ousted from the purview of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Agecies on account of the recent amendment in the C.P. Act, is legally not correct and the finding aforesaid is set aside. Since the District Forum has not adjudicated the complaint case on merit, there is no option but to remand the complaint case for decision on merit afresh and according to the law and within the time frame of 90 days/150 days as set out in Section 13(3-A) of the C.P. Act.

4. Resultantly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order of the District Forum is set aside. The complaint case is remanded to the District Forum for decision afresh on merit of the case and according to law and within the time frame as mentioned above. In case the complainant and/or the O.Ps. makes a request to lead further evidence in the case, the District Forum shall allow a reasonable opportunity to the parties to lead such evidence. The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh on 21.3.2005.

Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.

Appeal allowed.