AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS is an appeal by the complainant against an order of the District Forum refusing to entertain the complaint on the ground that complainant is not a consumer.
CASE of complainant is that he supplied some scientific materials to opposite parties. However, opposite parties have not paid the price of the same. Thus, complainant is entitled to the payment of the price which was undertaken to be paid by the opposite parties. A consumer can alone file a complaint for his suffering. When we asked Mr. Pradhan how the complainant is a consumer, he submitted that the question whether the complainant is a consumer can be considered only after notice to the opposite parties since a consumer dispute would arise if the opposite party would deny the claim of the complainant. Therefore, the District Forum ought not to have rejected the complaint before issue of notice.
We are not impressed with the submission of Mr. Pradhan. When on the face of the claim made in the complaint we find that the complainant cannot be a consumer, refusal to entertain a complaint cannot be said to be wrong. The redressal agency under the Consumer Protection Act is not a forum for realization of money. A person who has supplied goods is not a consumer to receive payment of the price of goods. Thus, there is no merit in this appeal.
IN result, the appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.