LANDMARK CASE

Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta

(1994) 1 SCC 243 · Supreme Court of India · Consumer law

At a glance

Citation: (1994) 1 SCC 243
Court: Supreme Court of India
Area of law: Consumer law
In one line: Yes. Housing construction is a service, and the authority was liable. Officers responsible could be made to pay.

1 Facts

A development authority delayed delivery of a flat.

2 Issue

Do public authorities providing housing come under consumer law?

3 What the court decided

Yes. Housing construction is a service, and the authority was liable. Officers responsible could be made to pay.

4 Why it matters

It made public bodies accountable as service providers.

5 Think about it

Why did the Court allow recovery from the officer at fault?

6 Analyse it yourself

Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.

7 More cases on Consumer law

Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha (1995) 6 SCC 651

All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz

← Lok Prahari v. Union of India M'Naghten's Case →

A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.