ORDER

13. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party Developer that the Members of the Complainant Society are not the ‘Consumers’ and that they had booked the flats/apartments for commercial purpose and earning profits, is completely unsustainable in the light of the judgement of this Commission in Kavita Ahuja vs. Shipra Estates I (2016) CPJ 31, in which the principle laid down is that the onus of establishing that the Allottee was dealing in real estate i.e. in the purchase and sale of plots/ flats in his normal course of business to earn profits, shifts to the Opposite Party, which in the instant case they had failed to discharge by filing any documentary evidence to establish their case. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the Allottees are the “Consumers” as defined under Section 2 (1)(d) of the Act.

14. So far as, the plea that since the Allottees had defaulted in making timely payment as per Payment Plan, the offer of possession was not made to them despite the fact that the Completion Certificate was expected to be obtained very soon, is concerned, we are of the