AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
MR. R.K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the complainant has been heard.
ADMITTEDLY the complainant was approached by a third party to despatch goods on consignment from Sahibabad to Hyderabad. It is again admitted by Mr. Gupta that allegedly a vehicle on payment of Rs. 16,000/- was hired by the complainant from yet another party who has been arrayed as an opposite party in the complaint because the complainant was running short of vehicles. It is said that the hired vehicle did not reach the destination for which an F.I.R. was lodged. On these facts the complainant has desired proceedings against the two opposite parties, M/s. Sanjay Roadlines and Sri Naveen Kumar for decree to the value of the consignment Rs. 11,19,649/- and allied reliefs.
The definition of "consumer" would certainly exclude persons who avail services for any commercial purposes as is mentioned in Clause (ii) of Sub-section (d) of Section 2 of COPRA. The complaint, therefore, is not maintainable under the provision of COPRA.
HOWEVER, if the complainant has any other subsisting legal right before any other Court or Tribunal, that shall not be taken to have been in any way interrupted or barred by the orders of this Commission. With the aforesaid observation, the complaint is dismissed. Let copy of the order be made available to the parties. Complaint dismissed.