SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

AJIT BHARIHOKE, S.M.KANTIKAR
DINESH SOMANI – Appellant
Versus
JMD CONSTRUCTION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Varun B., Advocate, for the Complainants; Nemo, for the Opposite Party

ORDER

1. Complainant has filed the joint complaint against the opposite party alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in respect of contract work given to the opposite party for construction at the factory premises site of the complainant. It is not necessary to enumerate the facts in detail facts because we are concerned with the issue of maintainability.

2. Section 2(1)(d) of the Act defines the term 'consumer' as under:

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 deferrded 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 othe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top