{"id":200627,"date":"2018-08-25T16:00:37","date_gmt":"2018-08-25T10:30:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=200627"},"modified":"2018-12-13T17:22:47","modified_gmt":"2018-12-13T11:52:47","slug":"consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","title":{"rendered":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): <\/strong>A Division Bench of Dr S.M. Kantikar and Dinesh Singh, Members, dismissed a revision petition filed against the order of the State Commission.<\/p>\n

The petitioners, in this case, had purchased a car in the name of their company Harmony Colonizers (P) Ltd. from respondent and it suddenly stopped one day after 4 years of its purchase. Thereafter, respondent charged a sum of Rs 3,95,190 as repair charges, which were paid by the petitioner under protest. The petitioner then filed a complaint before the District Forum, claiming deficiency of services on the part of respondent and the same was allowed. The State Commission reversed the order of the district forum on the ground that complainants do not fit into the definition of consumer for the purpose of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<\/p>\n

The main issue that arose for consideration was whether the petitioners fall under the definition of consumer for the purpose of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<\/p>\n

The Commission observed that as stated by the State Commission, the petitioner failed to provide cogent evidence to prove that the car was purchased for their personal use. It further observed that in order to interfere with State Commission\u2019s order there must be a jurisdictional error, or grave error in appreciating the evidence, or ignorance of a legal or miscarriage of justice. None of the elements were present in the instant case.<\/p>\n

The Commission held that the petitioners were not consumers under the Act and were attempting to misuse the statutory processes provided for better protection of the interest of consumers to obtain wrong gains and to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 qua the respondents. It was further held that the petition filed was frivolous and vexatious and hence it was dismissed with costs of Rs 25,000 imposed on petitioners for filing a frivolous petition.[Suresh Singla v. Jaycee Automobiles (P) Ltd.,2018 SCC OnLine NCDRC 375<\/b><\/a>, order dated 23-08-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench of Dr S.M. Kantikar and Dinesh Singh, Members, dismissed a revision petition filed <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":199533,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[14601,31597,31599,31598,29863],"class_list":["post-200627","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-consumer","tag-consumer-protection-act-1986","tag-nuisance-value","tag-protection-of-interest","tag-state-commission"],"yoast_head":"\nConsumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench of Dr S.M. Kantikar and Dinesh Singh, Members, dismissed a revision petition filed\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-08-25T10:30:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-13T11:52:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\",\"name\":\"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-08-25T10:30:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-13T11:52:47+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887,\"caption\":\"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019","og_description":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench of Dr S.M. Kantikar and Dinesh Singh, Members, dismissed a revision petition filed","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-08-25T10:30:37+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-13T11:52:47+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","name":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","datePublished":"2018-08-25T10:30:37+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-13T11:52:47+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","width":1330,"height":887,"caption":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-obtain-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to obtain wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":203356,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/09\/consumer-protection-act-1986-is-not-meant-to-be-a-tool-to-attempt-wrong-gains-or-to-create-nuisance-value\/","url_meta":{"origin":200627,"position":0},"title":"Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not meant to be a tool to attempt wrong gains or to create \u2018nuisance value\u2019","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 9, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench of S.M. Kantikar, Presiding Member and Dinesh Singh, Member, dismissed an appeal with costs filed against the order of State Commission whereby his claim for deficiency of services, against the respondents, was rejected. The appellant had purchased a postpaid internet connection\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":203215,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/06\/manufacturers-and-not-farmers-have-the-onus-to-prove-the-quality-of-seeds-under-consumer-protection-act-1986\/","url_meta":{"origin":200627,"position":1},"title":"Manufacturers, and not farmers, have the onus to prove the quality of seeds under Consumer Protection Act, 1986","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 6, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Division Bench comprising of R.K. Agrawal, J. and M. Shreesha, Member dismissed the revision petition filed against the order of Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission confirming payment of compensation to the respondent\/complainant \u2013 farmers for supply of inferior quality of seeds by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":234301,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/20\/p-hc-dismisses-writ-petition\/","url_meta":{"origin":200627,"position":2},"title":"P&H HC | Orders of State Commission in consumer dispute matters to be appealed before National Commission; HC dismisses writ petition","author":"Editor","date":"August 20, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Punjab & Haryana High Court: Suvir Sehgal, J., dismissed the writ petition for lack of maintainability and directed the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The petitioner has sought for the quashing of the order passed by the respondent in Consumer Complaint No. 35\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":267017,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/18\/if-a-person-makes-an-investment-in-shares-will-he-be-considered-a-consumer-ncdrc-consumer-protection-act-legalnews-law-legalupdate\/","url_meta":{"origin":200627,"position":3},"title":"If a person makes an investment in shares, will he be considered a Consumer under S. 2(1)(d) of Consumer Protection Act? NCDRC elaborates in view of \u2018earning livelihood\u2019","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 18, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): C. Viswanath, Presiding Member, held that the complainant was not investing money in the share market exclusively for earning his livelihood, hence the same was he did not fall under the definition of Consumer. Instant revision was filed by the petitioner under Section 21(b)\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":366963,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/17\/company-buying-software-for-profits-not-a-consumer-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":200627,"position":4},"title":"Company purchasing automation software to maximise profits and reduce costs not a ‘consumer’: Supreme Court","author":"Arushi","date":"November 17, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Identity of the person making the purchase, or the value of the transaction, is not conclusive to determine whether the transaction or activity is for a commercial purpose. Dominant intention or purpose is required to be seen.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Company buying software for profits not consumer","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/blog-2025-11-17T172903.385-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/blog-2025-11-17T172903.385-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/blog-2025-11-17T172903.385-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/blog-2025-11-17T172903.385-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":244408,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/25\/educational-institutions\/","url_meta":{"origin":200627,"position":5},"title":"NCDRC | Whether educational institutions and co-curricular activities such as swimming provided by them will be covered under Consumer Protection Act? Read on","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 25, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): C. Viswanath (Presiding Member) addressed the issue of whether educational institutions fall under the ambit of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The instant appeal was filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Order of Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200627","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=200627"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200627\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/199533"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=200627"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=200627"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=200627"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}