LT.COL.B.L.GUPTA vs MANAGING DIRECTOR, ARMY WELFARE HOUSING ORGANISATION

AFTER hearing both sides, we have come to the conclusion that this appeal has to be allowed and the case has to be remanded to the State Commission for adjudication on merits. The State Commission has declined to adjudicate on the merits of the complaint taking the view that the Respondent-organisation is functioning on no profit and no loss basis, and the complainant who has paid the requisite amount of deposit for a flat in the Army Welfare Housing Scheme organised by the Respondent cannot be regarding a consumer. In the light of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Lucknow Development Authority v.M.K.Gupta,imi992) CPJ 7. decided on 5.11.1993 confirming the order passed by this Commission in U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Garima Shukla I (1991) CPJ 1. and the connected cases, it must be held that the activity of the respondent organisation in construction and providing flats on receipt of consideration from the members of the Armed Forces either present or past, clearly falls within the scope of the expression "service" as defined in Section 2(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The fact that the organisation which is rendering such service for consideration is functioning on a no profit no loss basis is totally irrelevant in this context, when the service promised to be rendered to the complainant was for a consideration. The petitioner who has hired the services of the Respondent by paying the requisite amount of advance deposit is, therefore, entitled to be treated as a ''consumer'' and his complaint petition has to be adjudicated under the Act. The order of the State Commission is accordingly set aside and the complaint petition is remanded to the State Commission for adjudication on the merits after giving a full and fair opportunity to both sides to place all their sub-missions before it concerning the merits of the case. The parties will bear their respective costs in this appeal.

WE fix third June, 1994 as the date on which both the parties shall appear before the State Commission for taking orders as to the subsequent date on which the further proceedings are proposed to be taken by the State Commission on the complaint petition.