IMPORTANT POINT
Consumer Forum cannot entertain complaint from commercial establishments.

S.C Vyas, President—This appeal has arisen out of the order, dated 18.3.2011 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (hereinafter called “District Forum” for short), passed in Complaint Case No.36/2010, whereby the appellants herein, have been directed to pay Rs.60,000 to the complainant, alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of its recovery till date of payment and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,000 as cost of litigation and also not to enforce the demand bill of Rs.l,81,101 issued by Electricity Supply Company to the complainant/respondent as additional bill.

2. The case of the complainant/respondent before District Forum was that an industry was being run by him after seeking financial assistance from Khadi Gramodyog Board under the category of Small Industry and thereafter the electricity supply connection was sought from the appellants herein, which was provided after execution of documents between the parties containing terms and conditions of the supply of electricity. It has been averred that the complainant/respondent, was paying electricity bill as per demand made by the appellants and business concern of the complainat/respondent was not a commercial organization but was an industry, as per categories fixed by the Electricity Supply Company, but even then the officers of the Electricity Supply Company mistakenly presumed the concern of the complainant/respondent as a business concern and a bill of Rs.1,81,101 for past supply was issued pertaining to years 2002 to 2006. Issuance of such bill comes in the category of deficiency in service. The Electricity Supply Company was insisting to pay the amount of bill, otherwise was threatening to disconnect the supply and so, under protest an amount of Rs.60,000 was deposited with the Electricity Supply Company and then consumer complaint was filed before District Forum seeking prohibitory order against the Electricity Supply Company for recovery of the amount billed. It has further been stated by the complainant in the complaint that in the unit of the complainant, metal is to be mixed with hot tar-coal and it is a hot mixed unit which prepare hot mixed metal with tar, which is used for the purpose of road Construction and to other places also, thus, it was an industry and not a commercial unit.

3. The appellants herein, in written version have averred that in the unit of the complainant, there is no finished products of some goods but simply hot mix of metal and tar for the .purpose of construction of road, so the unit was not an industry, but was a commercial organization, and therefore, demand was raised treating the electricity supply connection of the complainant as commercial supply and not as industrial supply and in doing so, the appellants have not committed any deficiency in service, because the bill was issued on the basis of Report of the Auditor following the rules and regulations.

4. Learned District Forum, after having considered the material placed before it by both parties allowed the complaint in terms stated herein before.

5. We have heard the arguments advanced by both parties and perused the record of the District Forum.

6. The first question for consideration arises before us is whether the complainant/ respondent comes in the category of “consumer” as defined in Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called “Act” for short) and whether the complaint filed by the complainant before District Forum was maintainable under the provisions of the Act.

7. The definition of the “consumer” under Section 2(1)(d) of Act, is as under:

“(d) “consumer” means any person who:

(i) buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment when such