ORDER

The present Revision Petition has been filed under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the Impugned Order dated 11.11.2021 passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as State Commission) in First Appeal No. 1168 of 2011, whereby the State Commission had dismissed the Appeal filed by Sh. Bal Mukand Joshi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Petitioner/Complainant’) by affirming the Order dated 06.04.2011 passed in Complaint No. 33 of 2016 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhilwara (for short “the District Forum”) vide which the District Forum had dismissed the Complaint filed by the Petitioner/Complainant.

2. Brief facts of the case are that Mr. Bal Mukand Joshi, Petitioner/Complainant opened a share trading Account No. 135 BJ 02 with Suresh Rathi Securities Pvt. Ltd., Opposite Party/Respondent (hereinafter referred to as the Respondent), who is a broker in share market. Petitioner carried out trading like, purchase and sale of share through Respondent, who in turn charged brokerage from the Petitioner. In March 2008, Petitioner purchased some shares through the Respondent, payment for which were made through cheques. Despite making all payments in a timely manner, on 7.8.2010, Respondent sent a message on the cell phone of the Petitioner, making a demand of Rs.79,309/- as debit balance in his account. On 3.11.2008, the Petitioner went to Jodhpur in order to discern the ledger or bill and contract received and discerned the ledger dated 2.4.2008 to 4.11.2008, wherein he found that the Respondent indulged in unauthorized trade through the Petitioner’s account. Due to the unauthorized trading carried out by the Respondent through the Petitioner’s account, the latter suffered a loss of Rs.1,62,439/-. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Respondent, the Petitioner filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Forum praying for recovery of his economic losses along with 12% interest, damages for mental agony, expenses of court, fees of court and advocate’s fee.

3. The Respondent contested the Complaint before the District Forum and it was submitted that the Petitioner himself has filed Application for referring the matter to Arbitrator before the National Stock Exchange and the same is pending before NSE. It was further submitted that the Complainant cannot raise complaint arising out of same cause of action before more than one courts/forum and prayed that the Complaint be dismissed.

4. After hearing both the Parties and perusal of material on record, the District Forum vide Order dated 06.04.2011 in view of the Judgment passed by this Commission in “Instalment Supply Ltd. Vs Kangda Ex- Service Men Transport Company and Others [2006(3) CPR 339(NC)], wherein it has been held that once the arbitrator decide the matter then the party cannot move in any other court for the same relief, dismissed the Complaint by observing that since the Arbitrator has already passed the award on 18.01.2010. Therefore according to section 21b, 13, and 14 of the Consumer Protection, Act 1986 the court has no jurisdiction to trail the matter, hence the suit is dismissed.

5. Aggrieved by this Order, the Petitioner filed Appeal No. 1168 / 2011 before the State Commission. The State Commission vide Order dated 18.09.2012 dismissed the Appeal by observing as under:—

“Since the arbitration award has been passed by the arbitrator on the request of the appellant himself and compliance of the award has already been made without any objection, we find no error or illegality in the impugned order dated 6.4.2011 passed by the District Forum, Bhilwara so as to call for any further interference in the present appeal. The same is dismissed accordingly as having no merits.”

6. Feeling aggrieved, the Petitioner filed Revision Petition, i.e., RP No. 2198 of 2013 before this Commission, challenging the Order dated 18.09.2012 passed by the State Commission.

7.