IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.           OF 2009 (D.No.15761 of 2007)

Trupti K. Patel and Anr.      ...Appellant(s)

Versus

M/s. Rocklines Constructions and Anr.      ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Delay condoned.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By  the  impugned  order,  the  National  Consumer  Disputes   Redressal

Commission  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  `the  National  Commission')  dismissed  the

original complaints as, in its opinion, the complainants were not “consumer” within

the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, `the

Act')  and  Respondent  No.1  was  not  a  “service  provider”  within  the  meaning  of

Section 2(1)(o) of the Act.   The point raised in this case is concluded by the judgment

of this case in Faqir Chand Gulati vs.  Uppal Agencies Private Limited and Another

[2008 (10)  SCC 345]  in which  this  Court  dealt  with  a  case  similar  to that  of  the

appellants and held that complaint is maintainable.

....2/-

- 2 -

In view of this, the appeals are allowed, impugned order is set aside and

the matter is remitted to the National Commission for disposal of the complaints in

accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties.

As  the  complaint  petitions  were  filed  in  the  years  1998  and  1999,  the

National  Commission  is  requested  to  dispose  of  the  matter  as  expeditiously  as

possible.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, January 05, 2009.