Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9.1) The terms 'consumer', 'deficiency', and 'service' defined in clauses (d),

(g) and (o) of section 2(1) of the Act as it stood at the time when the appellant approached the District Forum in 1994 are extracted below :

"(d). 'Consumer' means any person who - 
      (i)     xxxxxx

      (ii)     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 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.* [*The above definition was amended by Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 62 of 2002 by adding the words 'but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purpose', at the end].

x [ The words 'the provision of' are substituted by the words 'but not limited to, the provision of' by the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 2002 (62 of 2002) with effect from 15.3.2003] Contentions :

10. The appellant contends that though the agreement is captioned as 'collaboration agreement', it is not a joint venture as assumed by the State Commission and National Commission but an agreement under which the builder agreed to make a housing construction for the land owner and therefore, the activity of the builder squarely falls within the definition of service. According to him, the fact that he entered into an agreement making available the plot for construction of a three-storeyed building and agreeing to share the building after construction and receive towards his share the ground floor of the building plus Rs.8 lakhs did not amount to entering into a joint venture to share the profits and losses. He submitted that the basic scheme of the agreement was that the builder should construct and deliver a house (ground floor of the building) to the owner and if there was any deficiency in fulfilling the obligations undertaken in connection with such construction, there would be a deficiency in service; and that therefore, insofar as the term relating to construction of the ground floor for his benefit, the builder was a service provider and he was a consumer.