LAWS(NCD)-1995-5-24

TATA TIMKEN LTD Vs. CONSUMER PROTECTION COUNCIL

Decided On May 10, 1995
TATA TIMKEN LTD. Appellant
V/S
CONSUMER PROTECTION COUNCIL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition has been filed by the first opposite party challenging the legality and correctness of the order dated 24.3.94 passed by the State Commission, Gujarat, at Ahmedabad over-ruling the preliminary objections raised by the revision petitioner who was opposite party No. 1 before the State Commission that the complainants before the State Commission are not consumers within the meaning of Section 2(l)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act and hence the State Commission had no jurisdiction" to entertain and adjudicate upon the complaint.

(2.) THE complaint before the State Commission was filed by the Consumer Protection Council, Ahmedabad (1st respondent herein) on behalf of certain persons who had applied for the allotment of equity shares and partly convertible debentures in the revision petitioner company in response to an advertisement published by the Company offering to a public at large certain number of shares and partly convertible debentures. The grievance put forward by the petitioners was that these applicants were neither allotted the shares and debentures applied for by them nor were the amounts paid by them towards the purchase price of the shares and debentures refunded to them by the revision petitioner Company.

(3.) THE revision petitioner contended before the State Commission by way of preliminary objection that persons who had merely applied for the allotment of shares/debentures are not consumers, under the Act since unallotted shares are not "goods" for which any contract of purchase had been entered into by them and there is also no arrangement of hiring of service entered into between the applicants and the Company. It was further contended by the revision petitioner as part of the preliminary objection that in making an offer of allotment of shares or debentures the Company was not conducting any trading activity fund hence no question could arise of the adoption of any unfair trade practice by the Company in relation to such activity.