PARDEEP SHARMA vs CHIEF ADMN.,HARYANA URBAN DEVL.AUTH.&ANR

The Supreme Court held that once the appellant accepted a refund of 10% of the plot's cost, he ceased to be a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and thus lacked locus standi to claim possession of the plot. The Court affirmed the State Commission's decision which set aside the District Forum's order directing re-allotment of the plot, emphasizing that the appellant's acceptance of the refund constituted a voluntary surrender of his claim. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, upholding the lower courts' findings.