The case concerns the interpretation of 'consumer' under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, specifically regarding the purchase of a laser cutting and bending machine. The key issue was whether the petitioner, Virender Singh, qualified as a 'consumer' under Section 2(1)(d) of the Act. The court examined the distinction between 'commercial purpose' and 'self-employment,' emphasizing that self-employment generally involves personal operation, while a commercial purpose includes business expansion. The petitioner, already running a business, purchased the machine to expand operations and employed workers to operate it instead of using it himself. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, ruling that he did not qualify as a 'consumer' under the Act.