JURISDICTION OF CONSUMER FORUMS

(Referring to Judgments uploaded on Govt. website)

ISSUE - JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction :Distinction between Rl.Tribunal & Consumer forum

“In view of the definition of ‘untoward incident’ provided under section 123 (c) of the Railway Claims Tribunal At, 1987, it is beyond any doubt that the compensation on account of untoward incident can be decided by the Railway Tribunal and none else.”  Therefore, the District Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, could not decide the dispute; Union of India v. Ashok Shankar Sarkale, AIR 2006 Bom 198.

Jurisdiction to file an appeal

If a party is aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum, his remedy is to prefer an appeal before the State Forum and not to invoke the jurisdiction  of the High Court under Article 227 of he Constitution; Manimalan v. K. Subrayan, AIR 2004 Mad 446. 

Jurisdiction to file cases at two places. Forum & civil court.

If, in respect of the same subject matter, proceedings before the Civil Fora  had been instituted prior to the institution of the proceedings before the fora constituted under the Act and such proceedings are pending, the fora constituted under the Act definitely gets ousted of jurisdiction; M/s Shree Jagannath Constructions Ltd. v. M/s Kotak Mahindra Private Limited, 2001 (1) CRP 1. 

Jurisdiction in outright /auction purchase of house

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain complaints regarding the transactions of shops/kiosks having been purchased in auction from the Delhi Development Authority; Kashyap Constructions (Pvt.)  Ltd. v. Delhi Development Authority, 2001 (1) CPR 128.

UPDATED STATUS THROUGH LATEST CASES ON JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction of fora when direct consideration not paid

Improper care of elevators causing death of a person -Is it service under consumer protection act

                         National Commission held ‘YES’ inspite of the fact no consideration was paid by the complainant for any services. This is a case titled P.G.PAI v/s Care Elevators ENGG. Co. Ltd &others wherein National Commission went into details of each party’s role and responsibility towards public at large. Also the interpretation of section 2 (o) of consumer protection act which is inclusive and not exhaustive as held by hon’ble supreme court in number of judgments. ‘Services’ means services of any description which is available to potential users as facilities in connection with other number of services to consumers such as banking ,education,insurance etc. etc.In this judgment,‘includes’word had been the target for the court to elaborate.

Direct responsibility was set against OP-1 ,the operating agency . Further ,security agency was found guilty on two counts –first their security person had disable the electro –mechanic system which caused a loss of life . Also it was their duty to put warning about the disorder of lift which could prevent visitors to use the lift

 

Jurisdiction of fora in purchase of houses in  commercial purpose

National commission has decided a case in the matter between DLF Limited&others and Abdul Azam, Abdul Basit, Abdul Waseem, 11(2015) CPJ344 (NC) on 05.02.2015 on the above issue wherein appeals in six cases decided by the honorable State Commission of Delhi had been filed. The question of jurisdiction of the consumer courts is the main plea contending complainant is not a consumer as the purchase of flat was meant for commercial purpose

Beyond any reasonable doubt ,all these bookings were for the commercial purpose.                        On the basis of this admission National Commission held that if more than one flat is booked, it is treated as booking for investment purpose even the nature of property is residential.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Previous

Next