JUDGMENT

T.S. Thakur, J.-The short question that falls for determination in these appeals by special leave is whether the appellant-company was, in the facts and circumstances of the case, offering any ‘service’ to the respondents within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 so as to make it amenable to the jurisdiction of the fora established under the said Act. Relying upon the decision of this Court in Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta1 (1994) 1 SCC 243, the High Court has answered the question in the affirmative and held that the respondents were ‘consumers’ and the appellant was a ‘service’ provider within the meaning of the Act forementioned, hence amenable to the jurisdiction of the fora under the said Act.

2. The undisputed facts in the context of which the question arises have been summed up by the High Court in the following words:

“Indisputable facts are that the opposite party promoted ventures for development of lands into house-sites and invited the intending purchasers through paper publication and brochures to join as members. The complainants responded and joined as members on payment of fees. It is also indisputable that the sale and allotme