Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(NCDRC) 7096

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
R.K. AGRAWAL, J
M/s. Sahyog Homes Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Nabi Mumbai Municipal Corporation Hospital – Respondent
Consumer Complaint Case No. CC/19/455 | Consumer Complaint No. 429/2018 | Consumer Complaint No. CC/11/208 | Consumer Complaint No. 73/2017 | Consumer Complaint No. 617 / 2015 | Consumer Complaint No. 840 / 2018 | Consumer Complaint No. 254/2019 | Consumer Complaint No. 614 / 2019 | Consumer Complaint No. 298 / 2018 | Consumer Complaint No. 540/2018

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Kunal Cheema
For the Respondents: Not mentioned

The right of appeal is substantive and vested from the initiation of proceedings, and amendments imposing new conditions do not apply retrospectively unless expressly stated.

Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 19 - Consumer Protection Act, 2019 - Section 51 - Right of appeal - Amendments affecting appeal procedures should not be applied retrospectively unless expressly stated; appellants required to deposit 50% of the awarded amount, as per new regulations, unless appeals were filed before enactment. Legal principles uphold that the right of appeal is vested when proceedings are initiated, and procedural changes cannot retrospectively impact that right. (Paras 8-20)

Facts of the case:
Multiple appellants challenged various orders passed by State Commissions under the Consumer Protection Act, raising questions about the applicability of recent legislative changes to their vested rights of appeal based on earlier laws. (Paras 1-5)

Findings of Court:
The court established that vested rights derived from complaints filed prior to the enactment of the 2019 Act remain valid and that the new provisions requiring deposits for appeals do not apply retrospectively. (Paras 19-20)

Issues: The primary issue addressed was whether recent amendments affected appellants’ rights to appeal based on laws at the time of filing their complaints, alongside procedural deposit requirements for appeals. (Paras 6-8)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that legislative changes impacting appeal rights must not undermine existing provisions unless explicitly stated, affirming the principle that an individual's right to appeal is substantive and derives from the initial complaint. (Paras 15-19)

Result: Appeals registered without the need for the new deposit requirement as they were filed prior to the amendment. (Paras 20-21)

Table of Content
1. various parties challenge prior consumer commission orders. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. appellants argue prior complaints govern appeal rights. (Para 7 , 8)
3. analysis of legislative provisions and their implications. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. established legal principle on vested rights in appeals. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
5. court's directive to register appeals under prior procedure. (Para 19 , 20)

ORDER

R.K. AGRAWAL, J., PRESIDENT

1. M/s. Sahyog Homes Ltd. & six other persons have approached this Commission challenging the Order dated 28.02.2020 passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Consumer Complaint Case No. CC/19/455.Even though M/s. Sahyog Homes Ltd. have filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 13929 – 13932/NCDRC/2020.

2. Mr. Mohammad Mughni Usmani has approached this Commission challenging the Order dated 17.12.2018 passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No. 429/2018.Even though Mr. Mohammad Mughni Usmani has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 13166/NCDRC/2020.

3. M/s. Nabi Mumbai Municipal Corporation Hospital has approached this Commission challenging the Order dated 25.07.2019 passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai in Consumer Complaint No. CC/11/208.Even though M/s. Nabi Mumbai Municipal Corporation Hospital has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 14180/NCDRC/2020.

4. M/s. Apollo Infra Projects Ltd. and one another person have approached this Commission challenging the Order dated 30.05.2019 passed by the Orissa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack in Consumer Complaint No. 73/2017.Even though M/s. Apollo Infra Projects Ltd. has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 14345 – 14353/NCDRC/2020.

5. Sri B.H. Ramchandra and two other persons have approached this Commission challenging the Order dated 31.07.2018 passed by the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore in Consumer Complaint No. 617 / 2015.Even though Sri B.H. Ramchandra has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 15694/NCDRC/2020.

6. M/s. Parkwood Developers Pvt. Ltd. has approached this Commission challenging the Order dated 14.02.2020 passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No. 840 / 2018.Even though M/s. Parkwood Developers Pvt. Ltd. has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 15933/NCDRC/2020. It has also challenged the Order dated 16.01.2020 passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No. 254/2019. Even though M/s. Parkwood Developers Pvt. Ltd. has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 15934/NCDRC/2020.It has further challenged the Order dated 11.12.2019 passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No. 614 / 2019.Even though M/s. Parkwood Developers Pvt. Ltd. has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 16400/NCDRC/2020.It has also challenged another Order dated 11.02.2020 passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No. 298 / 2018.Even though M/s. Parkwood Developers Pvt. Ltd. has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 16401/NCDRC/2020. It has challenged another Order dated 24.02.2020 passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No. 540/2018.Even though M/s. Parkwood Developers Pvt. Ltd. has filed proposed First Appeal but it has been registered as Diary No. 16402/NCDRC/2020.

7. The Registry has not registered all the proposed Appeals as the Appellants herein have not deposited 50% of the awarded amount in terms of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document