Delhi

StateCommission

CC/406/2015

M/S SWO-INDIA LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S PARTHIVA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD. & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

08 Oct 2015

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                                                 Date of Decision: 08.10.2015

Complaint Case No. 406/2015

In the matter of:

M/s SWO-India Ltd.

Regd. Office 409, Block C

Veer Awas

Sector 18 A, Dwarka, New Delhi-78

Through its Managing Director and Authorised Signatory

Lt. Col (Retd.) Rakesh Rana, KC                          Complainant

 

Versus

 

1. M/s Parthiva Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.

Regd. Office 24/22, Nabalia Para Road

P.O.Barisha (Near Behala Chowrasta)

•  

 

Through its Director and Authorised Signatory

 

2. Sh. Gautam Das

S/o Late Sh. Satya Ranjan Das

R/o 24/22, Nabalia Para Road, C.M.C.123,

Behala, South 24 PGS, P.S.Barisha, P.O.Barisha (Near Behala Chowrasta)

•  

 

and also its Director and Witness

 

3. Sh. Anirban Mazumder

S/o Sh. Manik Chandra Mazumder

R/o 24/22, Nabalia Para Road, C.M.C.123,

Behala, South 24 PGS, P.S.Barisha, P.O.Barisha (Near Behala Chowrasta)

Kolkatta-700008                                  Opposite Parties

                                                               

CORAM

 

N P KAUSHIK                                -                       Member (Judicial)

S C JAIN                                         -                       Member

 

1.     Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

2.     To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes

 

N P KAUSHIK – MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

JUDGEMENT

     Heard on admission.

     Admitted.

     The case of the complainant in brief is that it is a Company working for the welfare of Indian Soldiers, ex-serviceman, war-widows, widows and their families. The complainant undertakes activities of social welfare and providing houses to the aforesaid category of the persons at low costs. OP is a builder and a colonizer doing its business at Ramnagar, Uttarakhand. OP proposed to develop a colony and residences on an area of 3.385 Acres lands in District Udham Singh Nagar (UP).

     Clearly, the complainant has not booked a single flat for his personal residence. He has entered into an agreement for the purchase of bulk of flats. Definition of ‘consumer’ as provided under section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 is reproduced below:

       “consumer” means any person who,-

1. buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or
2.           ³[hires or avails of] any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who ³[hires or avails of] the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person ¹[but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purpose];
5. [Explanation,-For the purposes of this clause, “commercial purpose” does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him and services availed by him exclusively for the purposes of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment;]

      Complainant is a company doing the business of sale/purchase of the flats, which is purely a commercial activity. For these reasons, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant is not a ‘consumer’ within the ambit of the Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. Complaint is hence dismissed in limini.

      Copy of the orders be made available to the parties free of costs as per rules and thereafter the file be consigned to Records.

 

(N P KAUSHIK)

MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

 

 

(S C JAIN)

MEMBER

(f)