NAVIN KUMAR Vs. M/S. OMAXE LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Navin Kumar, the complainant herein has filed instant complaint against the opposite parties alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in relation to a commercial premises booked by the complainant in the development project, namely, "Omaxe Connaught Place" undertaken by the opposite parties. The first and foremost question which needs to be answered at the stage of admission is whether or not the complainant is a consumer as defined under Section 2 (1) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and he has a locus standi to file the consumer complaint.

(2.) In order to find answer to the above question it would be useful to have a look on the definition of the term "Consumer" as provided under Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act. The section reads as under :-

(3.) Bare reading of the above makes it clear that consumer is a person who buys any goods or hires or avails of service of any one for consideration whether already paid or to be paid in future. The definition has an inbuilt exception which provides that if the goods are bought or the services are hired or availed for commercial purpose, the person concerned shall be excluded from the definition of consumer. Undisputedly in the instant case the complainant has booked the commercial premises in the development project undertaken by the opposite parties. Therefore, it can be safely concluded that the complainant had hired/availed of services of the opposite parties for commercial purpose. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainant falls within the explanation given in the definition of consumer which provides that for the purpose of Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act, commercial purpose does not include use by a person goods bought and used by him and services availed by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment.