Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home
Full Text

SHRIKANT G. MANTRI vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

SCR Citation: [2022] 5 S.C.R. 945
Year/Volume: 2022/ Volume 5
Date of Judgment: 22 February 2022
Petitioner: SHRIKANT G. MANTRI
Disposal Nature: Appeal Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2022 INSC 217
Judgment Delivered by: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai
Respondent: PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
Case Type: CIVIL APPEAL /11397/2016
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

Consumer Protection Act, 1986: ss. 2(1)(d), 2(1)(d)(i), 2(1)(d)(ii) – Appellant was a stock-broker by profession – He was also acting as stock broker for respondent bank – Appellant took overdraft facility from respondent-bank and also sought enhancement of the same from time to time in furtherance of his business as stock broker and for enhancing profit – Whether the appellant had availed the services of the respondent for ‘commercial purpose’ and therefore he was not a consumer as envisaged under s.2(1)(d) of the Act – Held: Ordinarily, “commercial purpose” is understood to include manufacturing /industrial activity or business-to-business transactions between commercial entities and that the purchase of the good or service should have a close and direct nexus with a profit-generating activity – What is relevant is the dominant intention or dominant purpose for the transaction and as to whether the same was to facilitate some kind of profit generation for the purchaser and/or their beneficiary – The relations between the appellant and the respondent was purely “business to business” relationship – The transactions would clearly come within the ambit of ‘commercial purpose’ – Therefore, it cannot be said that the services were availed exclusively for the purposes of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment – Appellant was not consumer under s.2(1)(d) of the Act. Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 1993: Object of the Amendment Act – Held: To enable the consumers, who are selfemployed, to file complaints before the redressal agencies, where goods bought by them exclusively for earning their livelihood, suffer from any defect – By the 1993 Amendment Act, insofar as services are concerned, wherever the word “hires” was used, the same was substituted by the word “hires or avails of” – By the 1993 Amendment Act, insofar as s. 2(1)(d)(i) is concerned, an Explanation was provided to the effect that ‘commercial purpose’ does not include use by a consumer of goods bought and used by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment.

2. Case referred
3. Act
      No Data Found!!!!!
4. Keyword
  • Consumer Protection Act
  • 1986: ss. 2(1)(d)
  • 2(1)(d)(i)
  • 2(1)(d)(ii)
5. Equivalent citation
    Citation(s) 2022 (5) SCC 42 = 2022 (5) Suppl. SCC 42 = 2022 (2) JT 377 = 2022 (2) Suppl. JT 377 = 2022 (4) SCALE 86