D.K. Jain, President—By these Appeals, under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”), the Complainants in Complaints no.37, 38 and 41 of 2012, question the correctness and legality of a common order, dated 03.06.2013 passed by the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Bangalore (for short “the State Commission”). By the impugned order, the State Commission has dismissed the said Complaints on the ground that having purchased more than two flats, the Complainants were not “Consumers within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act, observing thus:

“The fact is that all the complainants intended to purchase more than two flats in their favour from the opposite parties which appear to be for commercial purpose. Therefore taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, in our view, the main object of purchasing the flats by entering into agreements with the opposite parties by the complainants is for commercial activity and as per Section 2(1)(d) of the CP Act, they cannot be construed as ‘consumers’. Their main intention is to purchase the flats and to dispose of them or to let out only with a view to get rental income.