Mr. Justice A.L. Bahri, President—The short question but of great significance is involved in this appeal. The question is as to whether family member of a subscriber of a telephone can be a consumer, as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, entitled to move the FORA for the relief.

2. Telephone No. 601689 was installed in the name of Harpreet Singh at his residential address House No. 738, Sector 39, Ludhiana. His father S.S. Sarna is also resident of the same house and it is Mr. Sarna who lodged a complaint before the District Forum regarding faulty telephone aforesaid causing mental harassment and inconvenience. Since the complaint was finally disposed of by the District Forum on the technical ground that the complainant was not a consumer as defined, no opinion on merits of the complaint out of pleadings of the parties is being made. Suffice it to say that Mr. Sarna in the complaint pleaded that the telephone was installed at his residence in the name of his son Harpreet Singh and it is Mr. Sarna who has been a potential user of the same. Some evidence was also produced to indicate that Harpreet Singh had been posted at Bombay and felt inconvenience to contact his fath