Merely purchasing multiple flats can't bar consumer complaint: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has emphasised mere act of purchasing immovable property, even multiple units, cannot ipso facto bar the consumer complaint, unless and until it is proved that the dominant purpose behind such purchase was commercial in nature.

A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N V Anjaria restored a complaint by setting aside National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's dismissal of a plea filed by Vinit Bahri and another.

The court held, the NCDRC has erred in dismissing the appellants’ complaint.

The complaint was filed against M/s MGF Developers Ltd and another alleging deficiency of service in respect of a group housing project in the name of ‘The Villas’ at Village Sahraul, Sector-25, Gurgaon launched in 2005.

The consumer panel rejected the complaint, holding appellants do not fall under the definition of ‘consumer’ as they leased the said flat premises to Sunil Raman and the said act is considered as commercial purpose.

The court noted the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 does not exhaustively define ‘commercial purpose’, though the explanation to Section 2(1)(d) carves out an exception for self-employment and earning livelihood, the dominant intention or dominant purpose of the transaction is determinative of whether the purchaser falls within the exclusion clause.

In its judgment of February 4, 2026, the court held that the question of what constitutes ‘commercial purpose’ is a matter of fact to be decided in the circumstances of each case based on the purpose to which the goods or properties were purchased. However, the respondents have not placed any cogent material on record to establish such nexus, the court said.

"The onus of proving that the appellants fall within the exclusion clause of Section 2(1)(d) of the 1986 Act rests upon the respondents, and the respondents have failed to discharge this onus on a preponderance of probabilities,'' the bench held.