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

S.K.KULSHRESTHA, NEERJA SINGH, PRAMILA S.KUMAR
Ramesh Gujar – Appellant
Versus
Suresh Kumar Chhajed – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Shri M.L. Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Shri A.J. Bhoot, Advocate.

ORDER (ORAL)

S.K. Kulshreshtha, President—The appellant has filed this appeal assailing the order dated 18.1.2008 passed in complaint case No.71/2007 by the District Forum, Mandleshwar. It is stated in the order that complainant was not entitled to any compensation as he did not fall within the definition of “consumer” contained in Section 2 (1)(d) as the transaction was commercial.

2. In short the case of the appellant was that on 8.1.2007 he had approached the respondent No.1 for purchasing seeds of cowpeas (lobia) for growing the crop and in January itself the seeds were sown. Though the seeds germinated, according to the complainant, the crop did not give any peas, with the result he had to sustain loss not only on account of the price paid for the seeds, but also on account of manure. Though it is not mentioned in the complaint, learned counsel submits that the seeds were sown in 1.5 acre. He therefore, claimed a sum of Rs.1,50,000 as compensation. The respondent No.1 traversed the allegations contained in the claim and stated that the complainant was engaged in commercial activity and, therefore, not entitled to approach the Forum for any relief as per the definition contained






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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