Laws laid down by supreme court






Rule of prohibition contained in Order 9 Rule 9(1) of CPC cannot be extended to proceedings before District Forum or State Commission.This is because civil procedure code is not applicable to consumer forums except for a few provisions permitted under sction13 (2) of the act. Hence it is held by the apex court that second complaint maintainable when first complaint was dismissed in default for non-prosecution.

This order is passed in the matter of Indian Machinery Company V/S Ansal Housing & Construction Company which had come before the Supreme Court civil appeal no 557 of 2016 decided on 17.1.2016.

  This was the case which had come in revision before the National Commission in the matter between Ansal Housing And Construction Ltd V/S Indian Machinery Company against the order 22.03.22013 from Delhi State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission  FA No 800/2009. Complainant stated before the National Commission that the complaint earlier filed before the forum was dismissed on 29.8.2007 because of non –appearance. It was further  submitted to consider earlier complaint no 307/2007 as part and parcel of this case for the sake of documents attached and proceed this case from the stage the earlier complaint had been dismissed.

 The first question before the commission was to decide whether second complaint on the same fact can be maintained under he given circumstances.It was held that there is no provision in the law for second complaint on the same facts once it is dismissed in default.

The same matter has now come before the supreme court and it is held by the Apex court:

Relied upon the case of New India Assurance Co.V R.Srinivasan and is of the view that :

1.     There is no provision of filing complaint for the same cause on the same issue once complaint has been dismissed in default for non-prosecution but at the same time there is no prohibition also for the same in the consumer protection act 1986.

2.     The prohibition clause of order 9 rule 9 is not applicable to consumer matter as consumer forums follow summery procedure and not CPC

3.     Apex court in number of cases has directed that interpretation of clauses should be made looking into the purpose of law and consumer protection act being consumer welfare act,consumer should not be deprived of natural justice.

4.     Rules 15(6) made by National commission do not prohibit second complaint if dismissed in default.

Dr Prem Lata


Held on the first issue by Justice S S Ahmad , D Wadhwa

“ in the absence of the complainant , the court or judicial body will be well within the jurisdiction to dismisss the complaint for non –prosecution .So also ,it would have the inherent power and jurisdiction to restore the complaint on good cause being shown for non-appearance of the complainant ” meaning thereby that court or judiciary body can dismiss the complaint in default and also restore it back if non-appearance is justified.  


Become a Member of the new revolution "Consumer Awakening" and instantly expand your knowledge with the Important Landmark Judgements, Laws Laid down by the Supreme Court for Consumer Rights, Get access to hundreds of Featured Articles in 2 different Languages; English and Hindi - a valuable professional resource to draw upon, and a powerful, collective voice to advocate for your protection of rights as a consumer nationwide.

Thank you for your interest in becoming a "Consumer Awakening" Member!
You will find information on Customer Rights, what we're doing and how to become a member. If you are looking forward to become a member of our portal and gain access to Hundreds of Featured Articles which will clearly give you an insight of yoru rights as a Consumer, then Read Further. more detail on our technologies and technology process,