Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.22 seconds)

Kavit Ahuja vs Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishna Estate ... on 12 February, 2015

12.    The second contention of the Opposite Party is that Complainant is not a "Consumer" as defined under section 2(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as the Complainant had booked the flat with the Opposite Party as an investment in the real estate market i.e. for commercial purpose. The expression commercial purpose used in Section 2(1)(d) of the Act came up for consideration of this Commission in Kavita Ahuja Vs. Shipra Estates Ltd., CC 137 OF 2010 ON 12.02.2015 and the following view was taken :-
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 4 - Cited by 1050 - Full Document

Laxmi Engineering Works vs P.S.G. Industrial Institute on 4 April, 1995

"The expression 'commercial purpose' has not been defined in the Act and therefore, as held herein below by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works Vs. P.S.G. Industrial Institute (1995) 3 SCC 583, we have to go by the dictionary meanings, "In the absence of a definition, we have to go by its ordinary meaning 'Commercial' denotes "pertaining to commerce" (Chamber's Twentieth Century Dictionary); it means "connected with, or engaged in commerce; mercantile, having profit as the main aim" (Collins English Dictionary) whereas the word 'commerce means "financial transactions especially buying and selling of merchandise on a large scale" (Concise Oxford Dictionary)".
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 950 - B P Reddy - Full Document
1