Government Servant is not 'consumer' qua the government

The Complainant was not a consumer as he has not hired the services of the Central  Government for any purpose whatsoever nor he purchased anything so as to bring his status within the category of 'consumer'. As a matter of fact he himself rendered services to the Central Government in lieu of consideration. 


1 (2011) CPJ 473, para 18

Banking Ombudsman & Consumer Forum

Consumer after claiming relief in front of Banking Ombudsman can approach Consumer Fora 

IV (2010) CPJ 315

Forceful repossession of vehicle - deficiency in 'service'

L&T Finance, IV (2010) CPJ 402 (NC)
ICICI Bank v. Prakash Kaur, (2007) 2 SCC 741
ICICI Bank v. Shanti Devi, (2008) 7 SCC 532


repossession of a vehicle forcibly without serving any notice is violation of principles of natural justice.

Order is not effective unless communicated to the concerned party

AIR 1963 SC 395
AIR 1996 SC 1313
AIR 1998 SC 2722
(2002) 8 SCC 443
(2003) 5 SCC 413

pecuniary jurisdiction of the consumer forum

At the admission stage itself, the complainant has to prima facie satisfy that sufficient justification and material exist to make claim. I (2011) CPJ 308 (NC)

If the claim is exaggerated, it is to be rejected.

consumer - dispute : purchasing more than one vehicle makes it commercial purpose

Purchasing more than one vehicle for doing transport business amounts to commercial purpose 


1 (2011) CPJ  264 (NC)

Purchase in Open Auction is not 'consumer disputes'

I (2011) CPJ 449
I (2011) CPJ 526
(2009) 4 SCC 660 / II (CPJ) 1 SC

Doctrine of Election in consumer matters

It is well settled principle of law that once the complainant had adopted certain route for redressal  of his grievance, then he should have availed that to the logical end of that route.


III (2006) CPJ 136 (NC)
I (2011) CPJ 395

Excessive charging on eatables in cinemas is permissible

AIR 2007 Delhi 137

1 (2010) CPJ 98 (delhi)

Medical Negligence - expert evidence

Parties permitted to file expert evidence in remand 1 (2010) CPJ (NC)

Expert evidence necessary - I (2009) CPJ 32 (SC) "judges are not experts in medical science, rather they are laymen". This judgments looks pro - doctors.

See also 1 (2010) CPJ 620 (Delhi SCDRC)

Arbitration clause doesn't oust jurisdiction of consumer tribunals

I (2010) CPJ 602 (UP SCDRC) at para 4/5.

Medical Negligence - no fees, no 'service'

1 (2010) CPJ 281

See also VP Shantha

Medical negligence - when does the obligation of the hospital cease

Mahendra Devi v. Subrata Patra, 2006 CTJ 401 (CP) (SCDRC)

Obligation of nursing home and its staff ceased as soon as the patient was discharged in good condition.

Inordinate Delay in passing judgment by trial court ground for setting it aside

See AIR 2001 SC 3173
1 (2010) CPJ 611 (CG-SC)

consumer - definition

LAXMI ENG. WORKS Vs. P.S.G. INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTE reported in the AIR 1995 page 1428 and SCC 1995  (3) page 583.  - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1433560/ 


does not include 'commercial activities'.