We have heard Mr. K.P.S. Rao, learned counsel for the complainant on the question of maintainability of the present complaint by this Commission. 2. The above named complainant-Company has filed the present complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party/Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board & Ors., seeking the following reliefs: “a) Direct the respondents to refund Rs. 87,17,068/- along with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of payment till the date of payment of the same to the complainant; b) Direct the respondents, collectively and severally, to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 23,00,000/- towards the loss of business; c) Direct the respondents, collectively and severally, to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 43,00,000/- towards advance payment made by the complainant against the procurement of Plants & Machinery related to repairs and maintenance industry; d) Direct the respondents, collectively and severally, to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- which is the actual amount spent in attending the office of the respondents at Bangalore and elsewhere; -3- e) Direct the respondents, collectively and severally, to pay to the complainant the cost of litigation.” 3. We have gone through the averments and allegations made in the complaint. As per the complainant’s own showing it had applied to the opposite parties for a plot of land to establish a Service and Maintenance Centre for construction of Earth Moving equipments with the proposed investment of about Rs. Five crores. The opposite party allotted a certain piece of land allegedly after acquiring it from the erstwhile owners and allotted the same to the complainant-company for setting up of the above unit after receiving a sum of Rs. 87,17,068/-. However, when it came to the handing over of the actual physical possession of the land, the authorities and functionaries of the opposite party/Board could not do so as it was revealed that the entire land, which was allotted to the complainant against payment, had not been acquired and therefore, possession could not be handed over. Alleging deficiency in service the complainant has filed the present complaint. 4. Going by the averments and allegations, one thing is apparent that even to begin with, the complainant had availed the services of the opposite parties for commercial purposes i.e. in order to seek allotment of the land for establishing a unit of service and maintenance Centre for -4- construction of Earth Moving equipments, which has to be purely a commercial/industrial venture. Assuming that all other allegations made by the complainant in the complaint are correct and that the complainant may be able to establish the same one day, the question is as to whether the present Commission is the appropriate Forum for redressal of the grievance(s) set out by the complainant in the present complaint or the complainant should approach some other Court/Forum. In this regard, it is pertinent to note that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was amended by the Amending Act, 62 of 2002 effective from 15th March, 2003. By virtue of the said amendment the definition of consumer appearing in Section-2 (1) (d) has been amended and the amendment has brought a sea change in the legal position that any person, who avails the service of a service provider for commercial purpose has been taken away from the purview of the definition of consumer and is not entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the Consumer Forum for the redressal of his grievances in regard to defective service. In the case in hand, all the transactions pertain to the period between 2006 and 2011 and they being in relation to the commercial purpose, the complainant cannot be said to be a consumer. Since it is not a consumer within Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act, it is not entitled to invoke -5- the jurisdiction of a Consumer Fora. We therefore hold that the present complaint is not maintainable before this Commission. In the result, the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty to the complainant to work out its remedy before the appropriate Court/Forum in accordance with law. | 
