Rel­e­vant Cases

Consumer Voice - - Legal Matters -

In the mat­ter of Man­i­malan ver­sus K Subrayan, heard in 2004, the Madras High Court held that the con­sumer could not in­voke the ju­ris­dic­tion of the high court un­der Ar­ti­cle 227 of the Con­sti­tu­tion against the or­der of dis­trict con­sumer fo­rum. The com­plainant can ap­peal to the State Com­mis­sion, which has the power to call for records re­gard­ing any case pending be­fore a dis­trict fo­rum in the state if it sus­pects any ma­te­rial irregularity. In the mat­ter of Shree Ja­gan­nath Constructions ver­sus Ko­tak Mahin­dra, the Bom­bay High Court main­tained that ‘in case pro­ceed­ings be­fore the civil court have been in­sti­tuted prior to in­sti­tu­tion of pro­ceed­ings at the fo­rum con­sti­tuted un­der the act and are pending on the same sub­ject and same is­sue, con­sumer fo­rums or com­mis­sions shall not en­ter­tain the case un­der such cir­cum­stances . Sim­pli­fy­ing, if the case pro­ceed­ings are on or al­ready be­ing heard in a civil court, one can­not knock at the con­sumer court, and vice versa.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.