1. NCDRC in CC/123/2015 titled as RAVI KUMAR v/s M/S. S.S. CONBUILD PVT. LTD on Dated
: 10 Apr 2017 said as under:
3.Section 2(1)(d) of the
Consumer Protection Act, to the extent it is relevant, provides that the term
‘consumer’ does not include a person who buys goods or hires or avails services
for a commercial purpose, the only exception being the purchase of goods or
hiring services by a person exclusively for the purpose of earning his
livelihood by means of self-employment. Therefore, since the premises in question
admittedly, is a commercial premises, it being a shop on the first floor of a
shopping centre, the complainant cannot be said to be a consumer UNLESS
HE IS ABLE TO ESTABLISH that he had agreed to purchase the
said premises for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of
self-employment therein.
2. NCDRC
in CC/246/2013 titled as Mrs.
PRITI ARORA, v/s M/s ARN
INFRASTRUCTURE INDIA PVT. LTD, on Dated: 06 Apr 2017 said as under:
8. Admittedly,
the complainant had entered into multiple MOUs for booking commercial spaces in
the commercial project. Therefore, it cannot be disputed that complainant
has hired / availed of services of the opposite party for commercial
purpose. Therefore, unless
it is established
that case of the complainant falls within the ambit of the Explanation to
Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act in view of Exception carved out in the definition
of consumer, complainant is excluded from the definition of consumer.
No comments:
Post a Comment