Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.23 seconds)Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Dhulabhai And Others vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Another on 5 April, 1968
In Dhulabhai (Supra), the point involved before the 5th
Judges Bench of the Supreme Court relates to the exclusion of the
jurisdiction of the Civil Court. If the special statute expressly ousts
the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, the Civil Court cannot be
approached touching and/or relating to any matter coming within
the ambit of the said Act.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 15 in The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 [Entire Act]
Section 12 in Consumer Protection Act, 2019 [Entire Act]
Mohd. Yunus vs Mohd. Mustaqim & Ors on 4 October, 1983
In case of Md. Yunus (Supra), as relied upon by the learned
Advocate appearing for the opposite party, the Apex Court held that
mere correction of error can be done by the High Court in exercise
of the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India. It is further held that the High Court exercising the
jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India does not
do so as Appellate Court or the Tribunal.
The Limitation Act, 1963
A.V. Georgekutty vs State Of Kerala And Ors. on 10 March, 1993
Before the Kerala High Court in A.V. Georgekutty (Supra),
the writ petition was made inviting the attention of the High Court
that the complainant is not a consumer within the definition of the
Consumer Protection Act. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, it
was held that the Consumer Forum is competent to decide its own
jurisdiction and have the authority to determine whether the
person approaching the said Forum satisfies the definition of a
consumer as engrafted under the said Act.