Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 7038
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, PRESIDENT, HON'BLE MRS. SUDHA UPADHYAY, MEMBER
M/S SURESH COLLECTION – Appellant
Versus
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED – Respondent
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. SC/9/CC/13/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/S SURESH COLLECTION
For the Respondents:PRASOON KUMAR RAI (Advocate)
The 2019 Act alters consumer redressal jurisdiction, raising concerns about access to justice, necessitating further assessment.
Headnote:The judgment analyzes the implications of the 2019 Act on the jurisdiction of consumer redressal commissions compared to the 1986 Act, noting a shift in the basis for determining jurisdiction based on consideration paid rather than compensation claimed. The court observes that the legislative shift raises concerns about limiting consumer access to justice in cases with claims typically under one Crore, particularly in the insurance sector. Ultimately, the court concludes that the implementation and consequences of this legislative change require thorough examination and assessment.
4.1 A Plain and simple reading of the provisions makes it clear that the 2019 Act shifts the basis of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the district, state as well national commission from the value of compensation claimed under the repealed 1986 Act to value of the consideration paid for the goods and services. The petitioners and the appellants claim that this legislative shift must have the effect of annulling sections 34, 47 and 58 of the Act as unconstitutional.
12.1 Apart from the observation made by the national commission, the Ld. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that wherever value of goods and services paid as consideration is upto Rs. One Crore, a consumer has to necessarily approach a district commission. Taking the example of insurance claims, it is submitted that only in rare cases the insurance premium would exceed Rs. One Crore and as such the entirety of claims based on deficiency of service by insurance company will be restricted to district commission. The scheme under 2019 Act, it is submitted, has become lopsided and has impaired the original jurisdiction of the state and national commissions.
12.2 This argument is not based on any illegality, much less on legislative incompetency or ultra vires to Constitution. The soundness of this submission will depend on the working of the statute and the data that may be available for assessing its impact.
Its implementation and consequences have to be closely examined, analysed and impact assessed.
