Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s Vasudeva Adiga's Fast Food Pvt Ltd, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, running vegetarian restaurants in Bangalore, Mysore and other places, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petition sought to quash a notice dated 12.12.2013 issued under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in Complaint No.2672/2013 pending before the I Additional District Consumer Redressal Forum, Bangalore. The petitioner also sought a declaration that the respondent, Mr. T. Murthy @ T. Narasimha Murthy, does not come under the jurisdiction of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as he is not a 'consumer' within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Act. The brief facts are that the petitioner company had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the respondent. The respondent filed a complaint before the Consumer Forum alleging deficiency in service, and the Forum issued a notice to the petitioner under Section 13 of the Act. The petitioner contended that the respondent was not a consumer as the transaction was for a commercial purpose and the respondent did not hire the services of the petitioner for consideration. The court, after hearing the petitioner's counsel, held that the respondent was not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Act. Consequently, the Consumer Forum had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the notice dated 12.12.2013, and declared that the respondent does not come under the jurisdiction of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Headnote
A) Consumer Law - Definition of Consumer - Section 2(1)(d) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - The respondent filed a complaint before the Consumer Forum alleging deficiency in service by the petitioner company. The court examined whether the respondent was a 'consumer' under the Act. Held that the respondent was not a consumer as the transaction was for a commercial purpose and the respondent did not hire the services of the petitioner for consideration. (Paras 2-4) B) Consumer Law - Jurisdiction of Consumer Forum - Section 13 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - The petitioner sought quashing of a notice issued under Section 13 of the Act. The court held that since the respondent was not a consumer, the Consumer Forum lacked jurisdiction to proceed with the complaint. The notice was quashed. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent, who filed a complaint before the Consumer Forum, is a 'consumer' within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and whether the Consumer Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The notice dated 12.12.2013 issued under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in Complaint No.2672/2013 on the file of I Additional District Consumer Redressal Forum, Bangalore is quashed. It is declared that the respondent does not come under the jurisdiction of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Law Points
- Consumer Protection Act
- 1986
- Section 2(1)(d)
- Section 13
- Jurisdiction of Consumer Forum
- Definition of Consumer
- Commercial Purpose
