Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Prem Vashisht vs Punjab National Bank on 9 August, 2023
Bench: A.S. Bopanna, Prashant Kumar Mishra
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5355 OF 2007
PREM VASHISHT APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
In the instant case the appellant is before this Court assailing the judgment dated 09.03.2004 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh (for short `State Commission’) and the judgment dated 20.08.2004 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (For short `NCDRC’).
A perusal of the said judgments would indicate that essentially both the forums have concurred that a complaint in a matter of the present nature, would not be maintainable since the appellant cannot be held to be a consumer under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act.
This issue is no more res-integra in view of the decision of this Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Harsolia Motors & Ors., reported in 2023 SCC Online SC Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Rajni Mukhi Date: 2023.08.11
409. 16:53:30 IST Reason: In that view, without adverting to any other aspect of the 1 matter and on holding that the complaint filed by the appellant would be maintainable, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order dated 20.08.2004 passed by the NCDRC and order dated 09.03.2004 passed by the State Commission and restore the complaint bearing Complaint Case No. 33 of 2003 to the State Commission for consideration of the matter on its merits and in accordance with law.
Since the parties are represented by their learned counsel, they shall appear before the State Commission on 15.09.2023 as the first date for appearance. The State Commission shall thereupon, regulate the proceedings and indicate the date on which the learned counsel for the parties would be heard and decide the matter on its merits and in accordance with law.
All contentions in that regard are left open to be urged in the proceedings.
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
……………………………………………………………J. [A.S. BOPANNA] ……………………….……………………………………….J. [PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA] NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 09, 2023
2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5356 OF 2007
V.K. VASHISHT APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
In the instant case the appellant is before this Court
assailing the judgment dated 09.03.2004 passed by the State
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory,
Chandigarh (for short `State Commission’) and the judgment dated 20.08.2004 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (For short `NCDRC’).
A perusal of the said judgments would indicate that essentially both the forums have concurred that a complaint in a matter of the present nature, would not be maintainable since the appellant cannot be held to be a consumer under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act.
This issue is no more res-integra in view of the decision of this Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Harsolia Motors & Ors., reported in 2023 SCC Online SC
409. In that view, without adverting to any other aspect of the C.A.NO. 5356 OF 2007 3 matter and on holding that the complaint filed by the appellant would be maintainable, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order dated 20.08.2004 passed by the NCDRC and order dated 09.03.2004 passed by the State Commission and restore the complaint bearing Complaint Case No. 37 of 2003 to the State Commission for consideration of the matter on its merits and in accordance with law.
Since the parties are represented by their learned counsel, they shall appear before the State Commission on 15.09.2023 as the first date for appearance. The State Commission shall thereupon, regulate the proceedings and indicate the date on which the learned counsel for the parties would be heard and decide the matter on its merits and in accordance with law.
All contentions in that regard are left open to be urged in the proceedings.
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
……………………………………………………………J. [A.S. BOPANNA] ……………………….……………………………………….J. [PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA] NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 09, 2023 4 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 157 OF 2017 IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. NIPPON YUSEN KABUSHIKI KAISHA NYK LINE (NIPPON YUSEN KAISHA) & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R In the instant case the appellant is before this Court assailing the judgment dated 11.08.2016 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (For short `NCDRC’) A perusal of the said judgment would indicate that it is held therein that a complaint in a matter of the present nature would not be maintainable since the appellant cannot be held to be a consumer under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act.
This issue is no more res-integra in view of the decision of this Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Harsolia Motors & Ors., reported in 2023 SCC Online SC
409. In that view, without adverting to any other aspect of the matter and on holding that the complaint filed by the appellant C.A. No.157/2017 5 would be maintainable, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order dated 11.08.2016 passed by the NCDRC and restore the Consumer Case No. 397 of 2013 to the NCDRC for consideration of the matter on its merits and in accordance with law. Since the parties are represented by their learned counsel, they shall appear before the National Commission on 15.09.2023 as the first date for appearance. The National Commission shall thereupon regulate the proceedings and indicate the date on which the learned counsel for the parties would be heard and decide the matter on its merits and in accordance with law. All contentions in that regard are left open to be urged in the proceedings.
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
……………………………………………………………J. [A.S. BOPANNA] ……………………….……………………………………….J. [PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA] NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 09, 2023 6 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6108 OF 2018 SHREE SHARDA CHAINS PVT. LTD. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R In the instant case the appellant is before this Court assailing the judgment dated 11.01.2018 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (For short `NCDRC’) A perusal of the said judgment would indicate that it is held therein that a complaint in a matter of the present nature would not be maintainable since the appellant cannot be held to be a consumer under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act.
This issue is no more res-integra in view of the decision of this Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Harsolia Motors & Ors., reported in 2023 SCC Online SC
409. In that view, without adverting to any other aspect of the matter and on holding that the complaint filed by the appellant would be maintainable, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order dated 11.01.2018 passed by the NCDRC and restore the 7 Consumer Case No. 3851 of 2017 to the NCDRC for consideration of the matter on its merits and in accordance with law. Since the parties are represented by their learned counsel, they shall appear before the National Commission on 15.09.2023 as the first date for appearance. The National Commission shall thereupon regulate the proceedings and indicate the date on which the learned counsel for the parties would be heard and decide the matter on its merits and in accordance with law. All contentions in that regard are left open to be urged in the proceedings.
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
……………………………………………………………J. [A.S. BOPANNA] ……………………….……………………………………….J. [PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA] NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 09, 2023 8 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5045 OF 2023 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 3390 of 2019) SMT. CHAITALI BHATTACHARJEE APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SOMNATH BISWAL & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Leave granted.
The appellant is before this Court against the order dated 22.10.2018 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (For short `NCDRC’) in Revision Petition No. 3029 of 2016 which in fact, was a matter arising out of an order dated 06.09.2016 passed in an First Appeal No. FA/1014/2013 before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal. The proceedings before the State Commission was against an order passed by the District Forum.
Keeping in view the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s. Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Suresh Chand Jain and Anr. passed in SLP ( C) No. 5263/2023 dated 26.07.2023, the appellant herein will have to be relegated to the High Court to exhaust the remedy as has been indicated therein. 9 In that view, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions, we dispose of the appeal with liberty to the appellant to file an appropriate writ proceedings invoking the Supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court concerned. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
……………………………………………………………J. [A.S. BOPANNA] ……………………….……………………………………….J. [PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA] NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 09, 2023 10 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6334 OF 2022 M/S. MAGMA HDI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. MOTU PATLU RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the appeal papers.
The appellant is before this Court assailing the order dated 03.08.2022 passed on I.A.No. 5341/2021 filed in Consumer Case No. 1553/2018, by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (For short `NCDRC’). The NCDRC while disposing of the said application, has kept in view the earlier decision of the Commission in the case of Harsolia Motors Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. but also noted that the matter pending before this Court.Hence, application filed by appellant was rejected. Presently, the said issue is no more res-integra, inasmuch as this Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. versus Harsolia Motors & Ors., reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 409 has held that a complaint would be maintainable. 11 C.A. NO. 6334 OF 2022 Learned counsel for the appellant would however, contend that apart from the said contention relating to maintainability of the complaint, the respondent in the said application had also raised as to whether a complaint of the present nature, would be maintainable keeping in view the subject matter involved. This aspect of the matter in any event has to be examined by the NCDRC since at the first instance, the same has not been examined and has been disposed of only in view of the decision in Harsolia Motors which was noted at that point in time. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the other aspects of the matter and keeping in view the reason for which the application was disposed of in the said manner, the order dated 03.08.2022 passed by the NCDRC need not be interfered. The Consumer Case No. 1553/2018 shall now be taken up for consideration. Before proceeding on the merits, the appellant who is the respondent before the Consumer Forum is granted liberty to urge the other contentions relating to maintainability, which shall be considered and thereafter the matter may be proceeded in accordance with law.
In view of the same, the parties shall now appear before the NCDRC on 15.09.2023 as the first date for appearance. The National Commission shall thereupon regulate the proceedings and 12 C.A. NO. 6334 OF 2022 indicate the date on which the learned counsel for the parties would be heard and decide the matter on its merits and in accordance with law.
All contentions in that regard are left open to be urged in the proceedings.
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
……………………………………………………………J. [A.S. BOPANNA] ……………………….……………………………………….J. [PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA] NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 09, 2023
13
ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 5355/2007
PREM VASHISHT Appellant(s)
VERSUS
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Respondent(s)
([ GROUP MATTER ] )
WITH
C.A. No. 5356/2007 (XVII-A)
C.A. No. 157/2017 (XVII-A)
C.A. No. 5795/2018 (XVII-A)
(FOR STAY APPLICATION ON IA 66231/2018) C.A. No. 6108/2018 (XVII-A) (IA No. 67085/2018 - STAY APPLICATION) SLP(C) No. 3390/2019 (XVII-A) C.A. No. 6334/2022 (XVII-A) (IA No. 131234/2022 - EX-PARTE STAY) Date : 09-08-2023 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA For Appellant(s) Mr. Abhishek Atrey, AOR Ms. Ambika Atrey, Adv. Mr. Akash Giri, Adv.
Ms. Vidyottma Jha, Adv.
Mr. Kailash Vasdev, Sr. Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shivam Singh, Adv. Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR Mr. Vinay Kumar Misra, AOR Mr. Arjun Masters, Adv. Mr. Suraj Kesherwani, Adv.14
Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ananta Prasad Mishra, Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta, AOR Ms. Sonam Priya, Adv.
Ms. Aditi S., Adv Mr. Ayush Kr. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Mr. Vishal Arun Mishra, Adv. Mr. Pawan Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Harshita Nigam, Adv. Mr. Ujjwal Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms. Ameena Rehamani, Adv. Mr. Khushal Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Kaushal Kishore, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Kaushal Kishor, Adv. Mr. Parshuram Paswan, Adv. Mr. Pranaya Kumar Mohapatra, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. M. T. George, AOR Mrs. Susy Abraham, Adv. Mr. Johns George, Adv.
Mr. Debajyoti Basu, Adv. Mr. Soumya Dutta, AOR Mr. Siddhant Upmanyu, Adv.
Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Danish Saifi, Adv. Mr. V. Elanchezhiyan, AOR Mr. Venkita Subramoniam T.R, AOR Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Adv. Mr. Likhi Chand Bonsle, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Jha, Adv. Mr. Rahat Bansal, Adv.
Mr. S.L. Gupta, Sr. Adv. Ms. Gunjan Sharma, Adv. Ms. Shalu Sharma, AOR Mr. Asutosh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Bikash Chandra, Adv. Mr. K.K. Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sah, Adv. Buddha Dev Bhattacharya, Adv.15
Mr. N.Ganpathy, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Manpreet Kaur Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR Mr. Aakarsh Kamra, AOR Mr. Nimish Chibb, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R C.A. No. 5795/2018 De-linked and be listed after three weeks. In the meantime, Objections, if any, be filed.
Leave granted in SLP(C) No. 3390/2019.
The appeals are disposed of in terms of separate signed orders.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(RAJNI MUKHI) (DIPTI KHURANA) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Five Signed order are placed on the file) 16