Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUBRAMANI
D. Roja and others
Versus
Commissioner, Corporation of Madras, Madras-3. and others
C.R.P.No.2032 of 1997
Decided On : 09-12-1997
Article 227 - Consumer Protection Act 1986 - The court rejected the civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, stating that the powers under Article 227 should not be invoked if there is an effective alternative remedy, and it is better to invoke the statutory remedy provided by the National Forum.
Fact of the Case:
The respondents argued that statutory revision lies against the impugned order under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The compensation awarded by the District Forum was appealed by the respondents, and the State Consumer Forum allowed the appeal on the ground that the complainants are not the consumers, leading to the dismissal of the complaint. The order was challenged in a civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the civil revision petition, directing the petitioners to file a revision before the National Forum, as the powers under Article 227 should not be invoked if there is an effective alternative remedy.
Issues: Statutory revision under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, appeal against compensation awarded by the District Forum, dismissal of complaint by the State Consumer Forum, invocation of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and availability of alternative statutory remedy before the National Forum.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India should not be invoked if there is an effective alternative remedy, and it is better to invoke the statutory remedy provided by the National Forum.
Final Decision: The civil revision petition was rejected, and the petitioners were given three weeks to file a revision before the National Forum.
1. When the matter came up for arguments, it was represented by the respondents that statutory revision lies against the impugned order under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
2. It is seen that the compensation is awarded by the District Forum against which an appeal was filed by the respondents herein. The State Consumer Forum allowed the appeal on the ground that the complainants are not the consumers and therefore, dismissed the complaint. That order is challenged in this civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
3. It is settled law that the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India should not be invoked if there is an effective alternative remedy. When the National Forum is given such power, it is better the petitioners invoked the statutory remedy. Office is directed to return the original papers filed along with the revision so as to enable the petitioners to file a revision before the National Forum. Petitioners are given three weeks time for the said purpose. The civil revision petition is rejected as above. No costs.
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
