Hon’ble National Commission in the case of Travel India Bureau Pvt. Ltd. Vs Senior Town Planner HUDA, reported as 2008 (2)C.P.J. 329: 2008 (4) in which it has been held as under:-
“4. Words occurring towards the end in above sub-clause (ii)- ‘but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purpose’ were added and the explanation substituted by the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002 w.e.f. 15.03.203. Bare reading of the Explanation would show that services which are availed of for the purpose of earning livelihood by means of self-employment only are not to be treated for commercial purpose. Alleged service for providing two dwelling units at a cost of Rs.46,65,000/- by OP No.6, obviously, is not for earning livelihood by means of self employment by the complainant – company and the transaction is relatable to service for commercial purpose which has been excluded from the purview of the definition as given in Section 2(I)(d)(ii) w.e.f. 15.03.2003. Thus, complainant not being a consumer the complaint itself is not maintainable under the Act. Complaint is, therefore, dismissed as such”.
