BLB LTD. & ANR. Vs. K.K. PROJECTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above noted complainants have filed consumer complaint alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party builder in respect of office space / unit no. 1901 to 1908 on the 19 th Floor of Tower 'C' in 'Delhi One Project' undertaken by the opposite party.

(2.) On perusal of the complaints, prima facie a question arises whether the complainant companies are consumers as defined under section 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act ( in short, the Act) and if not, whether the consumer complaints are maintainable?

(3.) Learned counsel for the complainants Mr P Nagesh, has drawn our attention to the definition of 'consumer' as provided in section 2 (1) (d) of the Act, in particular the Explanation to the said section and contended that cases of the complainants are covered by the Explanation. Expanding on the argument, learned counsel for the complainants has contended that the above referred complainants who are occupying rental premises to run and operate their offices and were looking for their own premises to shift the entire offices at one place were doing so to ensure their livelihood. Therefore, booking of commercial units in the proposed project undertaken by the opposite party would not come in the way of the complainant companies to maintain the consumer complaints. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the complainant has referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case ' Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation and Anr., vs Ashok Iron Works Pvt. Ltd., (Civil Appeal no. 1879 of 2003) and H V Balachandra Rao vs Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation and Anr . (Civil Appeal no. 7784 of 2002), decided on 9 th February 2009.