Consumer Protection Act - Dominant Purpose To Be Looked Into To Ascertain Whether Transaction Was Commercial: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruled that a company cannot evade a consumer complaint by arguing that a flat was purchased for the personal use of its director. The case involved a consumer who filed a complaint against a real estate company for deficiencies in the construction and delivery of a flat. The company argued that since the flat was intended for a director's personal use, it did not fall under consumer protection laws. The Court rejected this argument, affirming that the company's involvement in the transaction brought it under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, thus holding the company accountable for deficiencies.