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
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, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the ‘District Commission’) respectively. The petitioner in furtherance prays for the issuance of a writ of prohibition, prohibiting the respondent no. 5 to 7 as well as other complainants in respect of recovery of claims. Moreover, the petitioner further prays for writ of mandamus commanding the Commissioner, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent no.2’) to specify the time frame to conclude the consolidation operation in the concerned area.
FACTS
2. The factual matrix of the present writ petition is delineated below:
a. The petitioner is a Private Limited Company incorporated in the year 2007, engaged in the business of real estate development in Lucknow has launched a residential plotting developm
Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trademarks, Mumbai
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the jurisdiction of the State Commission under the Consumer Protection Act and the power of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of....
The High Court's jurisdiction to intervene in consumer disputes is limited and should not be exercised if effective statutory remedies are available.
Point of Law : Consumer Forum has no power to injunct or restrain a Bank from enforcing a right under a loan agreement, which includes the sale of mortgage property for recovery of the loan advanced ....
WhatsApp conversations cannot be read as evidence without there being proper certificate as mandated under Evidence Act, 1872.
(1) Appeal to Supreme Court – Appeal against order passed by NCDRC to Supreme Court would be maintainable only in case order is passed by NCDRC in exercise of its powers conferred under Section 21(a)....
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 acceptance of a written statement beyond the statutory period of 45 days under the Consumer Protection Act is impermissible and constitutes a gross abuse of jurisdiction, violating principles of ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.