2009 Supreme(SC) 4

Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. AGRAWAL & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI
Trupti K. Patel & Another
Versus
M/s. Rocklines Constructions & Another
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. OF 2009 (D.No.15761 of 2007)
Decided on : 05-01-2009

Complaints under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, are maintainable if the apex court has previously ruled that similar disputes fall within the legal definitions of "consumer" and "service provider."

Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2(1)(d) and 2(1)(o) - Definition of "consumer" and "service provider" - Maintainability of complaint - The issue of whether the complainants are "consumers" and the respondent is a "service provider" under the Act is settled by a previous judgment of this Court in a similar case, which held that such complaints are maintainable.

Facts of the case:
Complaints were filed in the years 1998 and 1999. The forum dismissed the original complaints on the ground that the complainants did not satisfy the definition of "consumer" and the respondent did not satisfy the definition of "service provider" under the applicable Act.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that the point regarding maintainability was already concluded in a similar matter by this Court, affirming that the complaints are maintainable.

Issues: Whether the complainants were "consumers" and the respondent was a "service provider" within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) and Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Ratio Decidendi: When the apex court has already decided a point of law regarding the definition of "consumer" and "service provider" in a similar factual matrix, the lower forum must follow that precedent and the complaint must be considered maintainable.

Result: Appeals allowed, impugned order set aside and the matter is remitted to the forum for disposal of the complaints in accordance with law.