The main legal point established in the judgment is that a complainant using a purchased item for commercial purposes may not be considered a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Additionally, disputes regarding the settlement of accounts do not fall under consumer disputes.

ORDER :

R.S. Sharma, President—This appeal is directed against the order dated 16.2.2018, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bilaspur (C.G.) (henceforth “District Forum”) in Complaint Case No. 271/2016. By the impugned order, learned District Forum, has partly allowed the complaint of the complainant and directed that:

(1) The OPs Company will not adjust any amount without written consent of the complainant from the amount of refinance i.e. Rs. 8,00,000 and will deposit the remaining amount Rs. 3,31,194 with amount of interest recovered from the account of the complainant within period of one month.

(2) The OPs Company will pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand) towards compensation for mental agony, to the complainant.

(3) The OPs Company will pay a sum of Rs. 5,000 (Rupees five thousand) towards cost of litigation to the complainant.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the complaint of the complainant are that the complainant is earning his livelihood by means of self-employment by plying J.C.B. Machine. The OPs is a finance company, which is providing finance facility for purchasing heavy vehicle. The complainant had earlier obtained loan from the OPs as per his requirement. In the month of November 2015, the complainant contacted to the O.P. No. 2 and requested to provide loan of Rs. 12,00,000 for purchasing JCB 3DX Backhoc Loader. The O.P. No. 2 accepted the request of the complainant and give consent for sanctioning loan of Rs. 12,00,000. After one month of the request made by the complainant for providing loan, the Finance Company took action and on 22.12.2015 got signatures of the complainant on various documents, but the Finance Company sanctioned loan of Rs. 8,00,000 to the complainant and out of the sanctioned loan of Rs. 8,00,000, only a sum of Rs. 4,66,806 was provided and the above amount was deposited in the bank account of the complainant on 6.1.2016. The O.P. No. 2 sanctioned only Rs. 4,66,806 but calculated the interest on Rs. 8,00,000. The O.P. by showing that amount of Rs. 8,00,000 was sanctioned to the complainant a loan, and obtained 34 cheque bearing No. 843856 to 843989 of Rs. 32,100 per month from the complainant towards security. The O.P. without giving loan of Rs. 8,00,000 to the complainant, charged interest on Rs. 8,00,000 for 36 months and gave intimation to the complainant that a sum of Rs. 10,91,400 is outstanding against the complainant @ Rs. 32,100 per month. The loan was sanctioned for 34 months but the interest was calculated by the Finance Company for 36 months and the same was added in the loan amount, which is contrary to law and rules. The loan of Rs. 8,00,000 was sanctioned by the O.P. No. 2 but only a sum of Rs. 4,66,806 was deposited in the account of the complainant and remaining amount was not deposited by the O.P. in the account of the complainant till date. The O.P. instead of calculating interest on Rs. 4,66,806, calculated the interest on Rs. 8,00,000 and added interest for 36 months and the payable amount became Rs. 10,91,400 which is deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. Due to not sanctioning Rs. 8,00,000 by the O.P. to the complainant, the complainant could not purchase JCB 3DX BACKhoc Loader due to which he suffered loss of Rs. 2,00,000 per month. The complainant suffered mental agony. The complainant requested the O.P. to pay remaining amount of Rs. 3,33,198, but O.P. did not given attention to the request of the complainant. The O.P. committed deficiency in service. Hence, the complainant filed the instant complaint and prayed for granting reliefs, as mentioned in relief clause of the complaint.

3. The OPs have filed their written statement and averred that the complainant purchased the machine for commercial use, therefore, the complainant does not come in the category of consumer. The complainant could not deposit the instalment, therefore, on the request of the complainant, the machine was financed twice. The amount of Rs. 8,00,000