AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 154 wordsAFTER hearing the Learned Counsel for the Complainant and Respondents and perusing the records, the Commission delivered the following:
THIS complaint against the B.D.A. is for directing the BDA to pay some compensation with interest on account of the complainant''s land being acquired by BDA. On going through the complaint, we find that the complainant is neither a purchaser of goods for consideration nor a hirer of services for consideration. Hence he is not a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Moreover, the land of the complainant was acquired according to the complainant himself in 1965 and the award passed on 27.7.1965. Therefore, the claim of the complainant is also time barred. Hence the complaint is dismissed. No costs. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the BDA and get the amount due to him, if the BDA agrees to pay it. Complaint dismissed.