Consumer service relationship absent in share and debenture allotment dispute, so complaint under consumer law was not maintainable.

Registration under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 was treated as relevant to the consumer-law objection, and the dispute over allotment of shares and convertible debentures was held not to involve hiring or availing of services for consideration under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Commission relied on the view that no consumer-service relationship arose between the company and the shareholder in relation to issue of convertible debentures. On that basis, the complaint was held barred by section 2(1)(r) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and was not maintainable; the dismissal by the District Forum was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the consumer complaint was maintainable in view of the company's registration under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, and whether the issue of shares and convertible debentures involved hiring or availing of service for consideration under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Analysis: The complaint arose out of an advertisement for allotment of shares and debentures, with an alleged promise to secure loan assistance for payment of the balance amount. The Commission noted that the company was registered under section 20 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, and that the National Commission had already held that no arrangement of hiring or availing of service for consideration exists between such a company and a shareholder in relation to the issue of convertible debentures. On that basis, the Commission held that section 2(1)(r) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 barred the complaint and that the dispute did not disclose a consumer-service relationship.

Conclusion: The complaint was not maintainable and the dismissal by the District Forum was upheld.

---