In view of the discussion, we find that the view held by two lr. members of the District Forum is not right, in entertaining the complaint and deciding the same in favour of the complainants. The complaint was required to be dismissed as the complainant was not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (d) (ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986 as the complainant had opened a demat account for the purpose of trading in shares-commercial transactions- with a view to make profits but ended in making losses. Consequently, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order passed by the two members of the Lr. District Forum and dismiss the complaint, as opined by the Lr. District Forum and dismiss the complaint, as opined by the Lr. single member, and, considering the facts with no order as to costs. The complainants would be entitled to claim benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.