1. Whether a Charitable Trust can maintain an action under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as a 'consumer'. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2019 Supreme(SC) 2497
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, Aniruddha Bose, JJ.
Administrator Smt. Tara Bai Desai Charitable Opthalmic Trust Hospital, Jodhpur - Petitioner
Vs.
Managing Director Supreme Elevators India Pvt. Ltd & Ors. - Respondents
Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.18636 OF 2019
Decided On : 04-10-2019
Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Manu Mridul, Adv. Mr. Sumit Mamgain, Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shalaj Mridul, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Ankit Anandraj Shah, AOR Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, Adv.
For the Appellant : Mr. Manu Mridul, Adv. Mr. Sumit Mamgain, Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Shalaj Mridul, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Ankit Anandraj Shah, AOR Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, Adv.
The Court questioned whether a charitable trust falls within the inclusive definition of a "person" and "consumer" under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, suggesting that the wide legislative intent and the term "association of persons" may encompass trusts.
Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2(1)(b), 2(1)(d) and 2(1)(m) - Definition of “person”, “consumer” and “complainant” - Whether a charitable trust constitutes a “person” within the meaning of Section 2(1)(m) to be classified as a “consumer” under Section 2(1)(d) - Where the definition of “person” is inclusive and includes “every other association of persons”, the legislative intent appears to be wider coverage, potentially encompassing a trust - An unregistered firm being entitled to maintain an action suggests that a trust should also be considered a “consumer”. (Paras 6, 10, 11)
(B) Interpretation of Statutes - Inclusive Definitions - Use of the word “includes” indicates an intention to enlarge the meaning of the word used in the statute, comprehending not only its natural import but also the extended statutory meaning. (Para 9)
Facts of the case:
A charitable trust filed a complaint under the Act claiming compensation. While the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum accepted the claim and awarded compensation, the State Commission and National Commission held that a trust cannot be a “consumer” as it is not a “person” under the Act, relying on previous judicial precedents.
Findings of Court:
The court observed that the definition of “person” under Section 2(1)(m) is inclusive and encompasses associations of persons, which may include a trust. The court found it difficult to accept that a trust would be excluded from the definition of a “consumer” given the broad legislative intent.
Issues: Whether a Charitable Trust could maintain an action under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and claim compensation as a “consumer”.
Ratio Decidendi: Since the definition of “person” is inclusive and covers associations of persons, and the legislative intent is designed for wide coverage, a trust may fall within the purview of a “person” and consequently a “consumer”. Thus, the previous view that a trust is not a person requires revisiting.
Result: Matter referred to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to constitute a bench for reconsideration.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Dispute over whether a trust is a 'person' under the inclusive definition of Section 2(1)(m) of the Act. (Para 2 , 4 )
3. Inclusive definition of 'person' in Section 2(1)(m) may encompass a trust; legislative intent favors wide coverage. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 )
4. Trust may be a 'person' under the Act, but the matter requires reconsideration by a larger bench. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 )
5. Matter referred to Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger bench to reconsider the issue. (Para 12 , 13 )
6. Can a charitable trust be considered a 'consumer' under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?
The court opined that the inclusive definition of 'person' may include a trust, disagreeing with earlier precedent, but referred to a larger bench for final determination. (Para 2 , 4 , 10 , 11 , 12 )
7. What is the definition of 'person' under Section 2(1)(m) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?
It includes a firm, HUF, cooperative society, and every other association of persons, whether registered or not, as an inclusive definition. (Para 6 , 9 )
8. Does the legislative intent support a wider interpretation of 'person' under the Consumer Protection Act?
Yes, the inclusive definition and inclusion of unregistered firms indicate a wider coverage, supporting inclusion of trusts. (Para 10 , 11 )
ORDER :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The principal issue involved in the matter is whether a Charitable Trust could maintain an action under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 (for short “the Act”) and claim compensation under the Act.
3. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jodhpur accepted the claim of the Complainant-Trust and directed the respondents to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5,90,000/- by way of compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum. However, the appeal arising therefrom was allowed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Jaipur on the ground that a Trust could not be a “consumer” within the meaning of the Act. The view taken by the State Commission was upheld by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which order is presently under challenge.
4. The reliance was placed on a decision of this Court delivered in Pratibha Pratisthan & Others v. Manager, Canara Bank & Others, reported in (2017) 3 SCC 712, to hold that a “trust” would not be a “person” and consequently not a “consumer” within the meaning of the provisions of the Act. It was held by this Court:
“5. On a plain and simple reading of all the above provisions of the Act it is clear that a trust is not a person and therefore not a consumer. Consequently, it cannot be a complainant and cannot file a consumer dispute under the provisions of the Act.”
5. It may be mentioned here that in Kalpavruksha Charitable Trust vs. Toshniwal Brothers (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd., (2000)1 SCC 512 the complainant was a registered Charitable Trust and the issue that arose was whether the machinery in question was installed for commercial purpose or not. The question whether the Trust could maintain an action did not squarely arise for consideration.
6. The expressions “complainant”, “consumer”, and “person” have respectively been defined in Sections 2(1)(b), 2(1)(d) and 2(1)(m) of the Act as under:
“Section 2(1)(b) “complainant” means—
(i) a consumer; or
(ii) any voluntary consumer association registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or under any other law for the time being in force; or
(iii) the Central Government or any State Government; who or which makes a complaint; or
(iv) one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest;
(v) in case of death of a consumer, his legal heir or representative;”
Section 2(1)(d) “consumer” means any person who—
(i) buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or
(ii) hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person; but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purpose;
Explanation.—For the purposes of this clause, “commercial purpose” does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him and services availed by him exclusively for the purposes of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment;”
Section 2(1)(m) “person” includes—
(i) a firm whether registered or not;
(ii) a Hindu undivided family;
(iii) a cooperative society;
(iv) every other association of persons whether registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860) or not;”
7. According to Sect
