STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 28.08.2023 Reserved On : 16.01.2025 Date of decision : 29.01.2025 M/s Tiwana Oil Mills Private Limited, Sirhind-Patiala Road, Village Kharouri, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib, through its Accountant/Authorized Person Gurjeet Singh, aged about 36 years. M-

98152-39360.

….Appellant/Complainant Versus

1. National Bulk Handling Corporation Private Limited, 7^th Floor, ‘A’

Wing, Dynasty Business Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, Chakala, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400059, through its Authorized Signatory.

IInd Address: National Bulk Handling Corporation Private Limited, 113, Second Floor, New Grain Market, Gill Road, Ludhiana, now at Shop No.113, IInd Floor, New Grain Market, Behind Arora Palace, Gill Chowk, Ludhiana, through its Authorized Signatory.

2. New India Assurance Company Limited, Unit-990000, New India Centre, 17-A, Cooperative Road, Mumbai-400039, Phone No.(02)-22020714, Fax-(022)22020608, through its Authorized Signatory/Chairman.

3. New India Assurance Company Limited, Branch at G.T. Road, Sirhind, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib, through its Branch Manager.

….Respondents/OPs First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 16.05.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Fatehgarh Sahib.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No Present:-

For the Appellant : Ms. Samo Devi, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Sh. B.S. Randhawa, Advocate For Respondent No.2& 3: Sh. Nitin Gupta, Advocate.

JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT Appellant/Complainant i.e. M/s Tiwana Oil Mills Private Limited through its Accountant/Authorized Person has filed the present Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 16.05.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Fatehgarh Sahib (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the Complaint filed by the Complainant was dismissed on the ground that he was not falling under the definition of ‘consumer’.

2. It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as had been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case, which are necessary for disposal of the present case, are that the Appellant/Complainant filed the Complaint before the District Commission with the prayer that the OPs be directed to make payment of the amount of loss/damage i.e.

₹

6,55,934/- including the compensation for causing mental agony and harassment along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum w.e.f.

25.06.2018 till its realization.

4. Upon issuance of notice, the Respondents/OPs had appeared and filed their written versions before the District Commission, wherein certain preliminary objections were raised. All other averments as made in the Complaint were denied. It was prayed that the Complaint be dismissed.

5. By considering the contents of the Complaint and reply thereof filed by the OPs, the Complaint was dismissed by the District Commission vide impugned order dated 16.05.2023. The relevant portion of said order as mentioned in Paras-10 & 11 is reproduced as under:

“10. From the perusal of the Complaint, it emerges out that the Complainant-Company itself has stated that it has been doing the business of manufacturing and sale of Mustard Oil and cattle feed etc. It is also mentioned that the Complainant-Company is doing its above said business for running the livelihood of its Directors, other employees and workers. No details have been given as to how many Directors/Employees and Workers are working in the Complainant- Company. In these circumstances, it is clear that the Complainant- Company is running its business fo