Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
SHEKHAR B.SARAF, PRASHANT KUMAR
Sahu Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks writs under jurisdiction. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. contentions from both parties presented. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court considers consumer protection framework. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. maintainability of writ challenge analyzed. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. finding against petitioner upheld by commissions. (Para 11) |
| 6. alternative remedies and grounds for writ jurisdiction. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 7. judicial power and scope of article 226 examined. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 8. jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227 discussed. (Para 17) |
| 9. supreme court rulings clarify maintainability issues. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 10. court dismisses writ petition and affirms findings. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 11. final dismissal with parties bearing own costs. (Para 27) |
JUDGMENT :
SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner has prayed for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned judgement and order dated August 1, 2024 and January 9, 2024 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’) and District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,
Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked where effective alternative remedies exist, especially in consumer disputes; exceptions are limited and clearly defined.
(1) Against order passed by National Commission in an appeal under Section 58 (1)(a)(iii) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, writ petition before concerned High Court under Article 227 of Constitution....
The High Court's jurisdiction to intervene in consumer disputes is limited and should not be exercised if effective statutory remedies are available.
WhatsApp conversations cannot be read as evidence without there being proper certificate as mandated under Evidence Act, 1872.
Point of law : Justice delayed is Justice denied” which is not a cosmetic statement. All the stake holders have a role to play in ensuring that justice is not delayed. There are several factors that ....
The court ruled that execution proceedings under the Consumer Protection Act must follow statutory appeal routes, and revisional jurisdiction under Article 227 is not applicable.
The main legal point established is that a party should not suffer due to the mistake of its counsel, and that the court's jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition is determined by the territories w....
The court upheld that when an alternative efficacious remedy exists, it shall refrain from exercising jurisdiction under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution, emphasizing the importance of statuto....
Right to an appellate remedy becomes vested when the lis is initiated. The remedy which was available prior to the amendment would continue to be available despite the amendment. Therefore, it is for....
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
