Rate a Brand or Service

Consumer Court judgement is contradictory to definition of Consumer as per  THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986  JUDGEMENT OF STATE COMMISSION, DELHI  Dated: 21.01.2016  (TDI vs. Yash Pal Saini & Sujata Saini - 2 cases) -      In complaint bearing No. 1270/2015, the case of the complainant is that he is a businessman and he decided to invest his money in some property as source of income that would generate livelihood and shelter for rest of his life. His sons went to United States of America for pursuing further studies and were not interested to join his business on return. He sold his Bhagirath Palace Sales Office on 08.02.2011 and invested in OP’s project to provide them basic accommodation on their return back to India and also adjust capital gain generated out of the sale of property -      In complaint bearing No. 1272/2015, the plea of the complainant is that she is a businesswoman/professional designer and she decided that she would invest her money in some property as a source of income that would generate livelihood and shelter for rest of her life. -      The question which arises is whether complainants are ‘consumer’? A bare perusal of above reproduction of the cases of the complainants shows that the complainants invested their money in the OP’s project. Thus they are not purchaser for self occupation. They invested their money with a view to earn profit by selling the same when the prices increased.             Both the complaints are notmaintainable. The same are dismissed in limini.  My OBSERVATION ON STATE COMMISSION, DELHI JUDGEMENT   State Commission has treated me & my wife as Investor instead of consumers, whereas as per THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986 detailed here under, we fall under consumer, as detailed hereunder: -CHAPTER -1, PRELIMINARY, 2. Definitions. - (1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—,(d)  "consumer" means any person who— (i)    buys any goods for a considerationwhich has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or underany system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other thanthe person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paidor partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment when such use is made with theapproval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains suchgoods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or Not applicable in our case (ii)   hires or avails ofany services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid andpartly prom­ised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes anybeneficiary of such services other than the person who 'hires or avails of theservices for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partlypromised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services areavailed of with the approval of the first mentioned person but does not include a person who avails of such services for anycommercial purposes; Explanation.— For the purposes of this clause, “commercialpurpose” does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him andservices availed by him exclusively for the purposes of earning his livelihoodby means of self-employment;  I am looking for a person/Advocate, who can guide me to go for appeal to teach lesson to builders like TDI &  Consumer Courts who protect them on one or the other ground and make consumers suffer.Thanks to everyone, who has spared his valuable time to read case history.My contact details are as under: -Thanks. YASH PAL SAINIMobile: 9811063192, 9971079229 Email- sainicoindustries@yahoo.co.in          sainicoindustries@gmail.com             From: Jago Grahak Jago To: sainicoindustries@yahoo.co.in Sent: Wednesday, 20 January 2016 2:38 PM Subject: New post "Rate a Brand or Service" in [Resolving Consumer Grievances Together] more  

GRAHAK HAS WOKEN UP BUT WHO IS THERE TO WAKE UP OUR COUNTR PARTS TO DO THEIR DUTIES. more  

In AIRPORTS OLD AGE AND THE DISABLES PREFER WHEELCHAIR AND A PERSON WHO TAKES ON WHEELCHAIR ASK MONEY AS "BAKSHEESH " IE TIPS NOT LESS THAN 100 RUPEES AND SOME TIMES ITS MORE. AND THEY SAY YE OOPAR TAK JAATA HAI. I DON'T KNOW WHATS THIS. more  

I had a working pre-paid mobile connection from Reliance in Kurdeg, Jharkhand. Suddenly they have stopped the services without warning. Contacted them after too much efforts and now they say that they have changed to 3g services whereas my handset is a 3G handset. After that they said they would look into the matter as I told them that I had stuck almost 6k so that I do not have a problem for the whole year. They say it is running but alongwith me there are others that are facing the same problem. Reliance is doing nothing because this area is more like a village but they forget that there are more that 25k folks running their SIM. Do not trust Reliance as they too have started to resort to dubious things now.. BEWARE OF RELIANCE FOLKS. more  

I have deposited by HTC mobiles for rectification of certain defects during warranty period is not yet returned even after 15 days. more