Recently, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided over by AVM J. Rajendra, delivered an important verdict. They declared that an individual who buys goods at a public auction doesn’t fall under the category of a consumer, and accordingly, the entity conducting the auction cannot be considered a service provider.
The backdrop of this ruling revolves around a complaint lodged by an individual who bought various items like bamboo, wood, and flagstone at an auction organized by the Forest Division office in Rewa. The office was unable to deliver some of the purchased items despite receiving full payment. The complainant sought redressal at the District Forum, demanding compensation equivalent to the current value of the undelivered items, a sum of Rs. 4,96,145. The District Forum ruled in the favor of the complainant, directing the office to either provide the remaining items or refund the amount.
Unsatisfied with the District Forum’s order, the office in question appealed to the State Commission of Madhya Pradesh. The State Commission ordered them to refund the amount to the complainant. The complainant then chose to escalate the matter to the National Commission for further deliberation.
Defending their position, the Forest Division office refuted the allegations, stating that the complainant failed to collect the items within the stipulated timeframe. They mentioned that the uncollected items led to the payment being deposited into the State Government Treasury as per the terms of the sale. They also argued that the contention stemmed from the auction process and was thus time-barred, warranting the dismissal of the complaint.
Upon reviewing the case, the Commission identified the crucial question to be whether the complainant could be classified as a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and if the Forest Department was indeed deficient in their service. They referenced a similar case, (UT Chandigarh Administration & Anr. Vs. Amarjeet Singh & Ors., 2009), in which the Supreme Court established that an auction buyer does not qualify as a consumer and the auctioneer is neither a trader nor a service provider. Therefore, such grievances don’t qualify as consumer disputes, and consumer forums lack jurisdiction over them.
Considering the facts and the Supreme Court precedent, the Commission declared that the previous forums overstepped their jurisdiction by hearing the complaint and appeal. As the complainant was an auction purchaser, this transaction didn’t establish a consumer-service provider relationship. As a result, the complaint and the Revision Petition were dismissed.
In sum, the case titled ‘Mohd Siddique Khan Vs. Forest Division Officer’ (Case Number: R.P. No. 454/2019) offers an important takeaway for auction purchasers. The ruling emphasizes that buyers at a public auction are not deemed consumers and the auctioneer is not a service provider. Therefore, any disputes arising from such transactions do not fall under the jurisdiction of consumer forums.
