Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From the National Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi)
M.R. SHAH, B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.
Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sanjeev Kumar Sharma and Others – Respondents
With
TDI Infrastructure Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Jyoti Bhardwaj – Respondent
With
M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Surender Sharma – Respondent
With
M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Ved Prakash – Respondent
With
M/s. TDI infrastructure Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Kusum Gaur and Another – Respondents
With
M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Ved Prakash – Respondent
With
M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Kabita Bhattacharya and Another – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 7098, 7099, 7100, 7101, 7102, 7103, 7104 of 2021
Decided On : 07-12-2021
(A) Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 51--Appeal to National Commission – Pre-deposit – It is a pre-condition to deposit 50 per cent of amount as ordered by State Commission before appeal is entertained by National Commission – However, that does not take away jurisdiction of National Commission to order to deposit entire amount and or any amount higher than 50 per cent of amount while considering stay application to stay order passed by State Commission – National Commission can pass order to deposit entire amount and/or any amount higher than 50 per cent of amount in terms of order of State Commission while staying order passed by State commission--Rules for entertainment of appeal on deposit of 50 per cent of amount ordered by State Commission, which is a statutory pre-deposit and grant of interim order on stay application subject to deposit of further amount are distinct and different – Pre-deposit condition as per second proviso to Section 51 has no nexus with grant of interim order of stay by National Commission subject to deposit of amount awarded by State Commission. (Para 11)
(B) Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 51--Appeal to National Commission – Pre-deposit – National Commission can pass order to deposit entire amount and/or any amount higher than 50 per cent of amount in terms of order of State Commission while staying order passed by State commission – However, while considering stay application against order passed by State Commission and while passing order to deposit entire amount and/or any amount higher than 50 per cent of amount, National Commission has to assign some reasons and pass a speaking order why conditional stay is being granted on condition of deposit of entire amount and/or any amount higher than 50 per cent of amount – Such an order on stay application is not to be passed mechanically – It must reflect application of mind by National Commission. (Paras 13 and 15)
Facts of the case:
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi dated 27.09.2021 in I.A. No. 3621 of 2021 in First Appeal No. 330 of 2021 by which, National Commission, while staying the order passed by the State Commission has directed the appellant to deposit the entire decretal amount with the State Commission, the original appellant – builder – M/s. Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Private Limited, has preferred the Civil Appeal No. 7098 of 2021.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the National Commission dated 31.08.2021 passed in I.A. No. 5880 of 2021; I.A. No.5881 of 2021; I.A. No.5882 of 2021; I.A. No. 5883 of 2021 and I.A. No. 5884 of 2021 in respect of First Appeal Nos. 856 of 2020, 857 of 2020, 858 of 2020, 859 of 2020 and 860 of 2020 by which National Commission has dismissed the said I.A.s and refused to modify or review or recall its earlier order dated 04.02.2021 by which, while admitting the respective appeals, the National Commission granted stay of the orders passed by the State Commission, subject to deposit of entire decretal amount with up-to-date interest, if any, the original appellant/applicant – builder – M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. has preferred present Civil Appeal Nos. 7099 to 7104 of 2021.
Findings of Court:
National Commission can grant a conditional stay of the order passed by the State Commission on deposit of entire amount and/or any amount higher than 50 per cent of the amount as ordered by State Commission.
Result : Appeals Partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “National Commission”) dated 27.09.2021 in I.A. No. 3621 of 2021 in First Appeal No. 330 of 2021 by which, the National Commission, while staying the order passed by the State Commission has directed the appellant to deposit the entire decretal amount with the State Commission, the original appellant-builder M/s. Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Private Limited, has preferred the Civil Appeal No. 7098 of 2021.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the National Commission dated 31.08.2021 passed in I.A. No. 5880 of 2021; I.A. No. 5881 of 2021; I.A. No. 5882 of 2021; I.A. No. 5883 of 2021 and I.A. No. 5884 of 2021 in respect of First Appeal Nos. 856 of 2020, 857 of 2020, 858 of 2020, 859 of 2020 and 860 of 2020 by which the National Commission has dismissed the said I.A. and refused to modify or review or recall its earlier order dated 04.02.2021 by which, while admitting the respective appeals, the National Commission granted stay of the orders passed by the State Commission, subject to deposit of entire decretal amount with up-to-date interest, if any, the original appellant/applicant-builder M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. has preferred the present Civil Appeal Nos. 7099 to 7104 of 2021.
3. At the outset, it is required to be noted that feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the State Commission directing the appellants to refund the amount paid by the respective home buyers with interest, the appellants have preferred the first appeals before the National Commission under Section 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act 2019”). That in the said appeals, the respective appellants/applicants filed the said applications to stay the respective orders passed by the State Commission.
4. At this stage, it is required to be noted that as the said respective appellants have deposited 50 per cent of the decretal amount by preferring the appeals, which the appellants are required to deposit as a pre-deposit at the time of preferring the appeals as required under Section 19 of the Act, 2019. But the National Commission has stayed the order passed by the State Commission on condition that the appellants shall deposit the entire decretal amount with interest, if any, with the State Commission. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the orders passed by the National Commission passed on the stay applications directing the appellants to deposit the entire decretal amount with interest, if any, while staying the respective orders passed by the State Commission, the original appellants have preferred the present appeals.
5. Shri Sidharth Dave, learned Senior Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 7098 of 2021 and Ms. Kanika Agnihotri, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellant-M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. in Civil Appeal Nos. 7099 to 7104 of 2021.
6. Shri Sidharth Dave, learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the respective appellant has vehemently submitted that the National Commission cannot pass an order to deposit the entire decretal amount and/or any amount higher than 50 per cent of the amount in terms of the order of the State Commission while entertaining the appeal in view of the second proviso to Section 51 of the Act, 2019. It is submitted that according to the statutory intent, the requirement of deposit at best can be 50 per cent of the decretal amount and not higher than that. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective appellants have heavily relied upon the number of orders passed by this Court against several orders passed by the National Commission granting stay of the order of the State Commission subject to deposit of the entire decretal amount with the State commission and this Court has disposed of
(1) It is a pre-condition to deposit 50 per cent of amount as ordered by State Commission before appeal is entertained by National Commission – However, that does not take away jurisdiction of Nation....
The court ruled that a 50% deposit of the decretal amount suffices for stay applications, emphasizing the need for reasoning when imposing stringent conditions by the NCDRC.
Appeal – Onerous condition of payment of 50% of amount awarded will not be applicable to complaints filed prior to commencement of 2019 Act.
Review Power under Section 50 – The State Commission possesses the statutory authority to review its own orders if there is an “error apparent on the face of the record.” This power can be exercised ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
