The main legal point established in the judgment is that a revision is maintainable against an appellate order passed by the State Commission before the National Commission under S. 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act.

A. K. PATNAIK, C. J. :- This is a petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 16-9-2008, passed by the Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Redressal Commission. Bhopal, in First Appeal No. 2513/2007 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Indore. dismissing the complaint No. C. C. 357/2006.

2. On 9-1-2009. a Division Bench of this Court, after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner observed that a question may arise for consideration whether an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner by way of revision under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act. 1986 (for short. 'the Act'). Accordingly, notice was issued to the respondent on this preliminary legal question.

3. When this preliminary question was taken up for hearing today. Mr. P. V.

Bhagvat, learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the provisions of Sec. 21 of the Act to show that under Clause (b) of Sec. 21, the National Commission has the power to call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by the State Commission where it appears to the National(Commission that such State Commission has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law. or has failed to exercise ajurisdiction so vested. or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity. He submitted that the expression "consumer dispute" has been defined in Section 2(1) (e) of the Act to mean "a dispute where a person against whom a complaint has been made, denies or disputes the allegations contained in the complaint." He submitted that the expression "consumer dispute" in Sec. 21 (b) would, therefore, mean all original consumer dispute pending before the State Commission, where a complaint is filed by the consumer before the 'State Commission and allegations made in the complaint are denied by the other party. He submitted that if this is the meaning of "consumer dispute" as defined in Sec. 2(l)(e) of the Act then under S. 2l(b), the National Commission has no power to call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any appeal pending or decided by the State Commission and, therefore, a revision against an order passed by the State Commission in a case where an original consumer dispute has arisen before the District Forum, is not maintainable before the National Commission. He submitted that this would mean that any order passed by the State Commission in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction cannot be challenged in revision under S. 21(b) of the Act before the National Commission. Mr. P. V. Bhagvat, alternatively submitted that in the event this Court holds that a revision is maintainable under S. 21 (b) of the Act before the National Commission against an appellate order passed by the State Commission, then the contention of the petitioner is that the revision before the National Commission is not an effective remedy in the facts of the present case and that the High Court should entertain the Writ Petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India against the State Commission.

4. Mr. Sunil Jain, learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the Delhi High Court in Cox and Kings (1) Ltd. v. Raj Kumar Mittal and another, 2009 CTJ 122 (Delhi High Court) has taken a view that the Act has provided an inbuilt mechanism for redressal of grievances of parties at three levels; one at the Consumer Forum, second at State Commission level and the third at National Commission level and that the National Commission has been given powers to call for the records of the State Commission and if it comes to a conclusion that the State Commission has failed to exercise jurisdiction so vested in it or has acted in excess of its jurisdiction, or has acted with material irregularity, the same can be rectified by the National Commission. He submitted that in the aforesaid de