District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No. 545/2022.

 Date of Institution:07.10.2022.

Date of Order:06.04.2023.

Mr. Lalit Malik S/o Shri Inderjeet Malik, H. No. 2174, Sector-8, Faridabad, Haryana – 121006.         

                                                          …….Complainant……..

                                                Versus

1.                Business Park Maintenance Services Pvt. Ltd., M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Circus, New Delhi – 110 001 (Regd. Office) “BPTP”.

2.                Business Park Maintenance Services Pvt. Ltd. Next Door, Sector-76, Faridabad, Haryana – 121004 (Billing address) “BPTP”.

                                                                              …Opposite parties

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana………….Member.

PRESENT:                   Sh.  Naresh Vashisth , counsel for the complainant.

                             Sh. Jay Shankar, AR on behalf of the opposite parties.

ORDER:  

                             Today the case was fixed for consideration on the application

for the dismissal of the complaint.

                             Authorized representative of opposite party has filed an Application stating that the complainant purchased Shop NO. G-31 in the Commercial  Project, Next Door located at Sector-76, Faridabad in resale from open market in the year 2019, is an investor who invested in the said shop purely for commercial gains.  Further the adjacent shop i.e shop NO. G-30 is also owned by the mother of the complainant namely Ms. Sharda Malik w/o Mr. Inderjeet Malik and both the shop i.e G-30 and G-31 are rented out to third parties for commercial gains.  Since the complainant and his family had invested in the commercial project in question as investment for commercial gains and profits, the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint.  It has been prayed that this Hon’ble Commission may kindly be pleased to dismiss the present complaint for being non maintainable.

                             On the other hand, counsel for the complainant has filed reply to the application  stating that the applicant purchased the said shop for his livelihood and covered under the within the definition of “ Consumer” as defined under Section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019. Hence, the application of the applicant may kindly be dismissed with heavy costs.

2.                          It is evident from sale deed vide Annexure 1(colly) that the complainant purchased Shop No. G-31 in the Commercial  Project, Next Door located at Sector-76, Faridabad in resale from open market in the year 2019, is an investor who invested in the said shop purely for commercial gains.  Therefore, the complaint does not fall within the ambit of Consumer as defined under section 2(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 3.                         As such, the complaint is not maintainable and is dismissed. Copy of this order be given to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record room.

Announced on:  06.04.2023                                           ( Amit Arora)

                                                                                           President

                       District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                           (Mukesh Sharma)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                            (Indira Bhadana)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                 Redressal Commission, Faridabad.