Kerala High Court Denies Relief To Petitioner Suppressing Facts, Orders Enquiry Into Allotment Of Govt Scheme Houses On Puramboke Land Candidate Missing Physical Test For Minor Illness Has No Enforceable Right To Rescheduling: Supreme Court Prolonged Incarceration And Parity Constitute Valid Grounds For Regular Bail: Supreme Court Accused In Cheque Bounce Cases Cannot File Evidence-In-Chief By Affidavit Under Section 145 NI Act: Orissa High Court Borrowers Have No Right To Personal Hearing Before Fraud Classification, But Full Forensic Audit Report Must Be Supplied: Supreme Court Pendency Of Matrimonial Dispute With General Allegations Not A Valid Ground To Deny Public Employment: Allahabad High Court Minimum Five Persons Mandatory To Prove 'Preparation For Dacoity' Under Section 399 IPC: Gujarat High Court Suit For Specific Performance Not Maintainable Without Prayer To Set Aside Termination Of Agreement: Madras High Court Trial Court Must Indicate Material Forming Basis Of Charge, Mechanical Framing Of Charges Impermissible: Madhya Pradesh High Court Gated Community Association Cannot Exclude LIG/EWS Allottees, Single Unified Society Mandatory: Telangana High Court Voluntary Retirement Deemed Accepted If Positive Order Of Refusal Is Not Communicated Within Notice Period: Supreme Court Court Cannot Convict One Accused And Acquit Another On Same Evidence: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Due To Unreliable Last-Seen Evidence And Principle Of Parity 138 NI Act | Accused Cannot Rebut Presumption Of Legally Enforceable Debt At Pre-Trial Stage In Cheque Bounce Cases: Supreme Court More Meritorious PWD Candidates From Reserved Categories Can Claim Unreserved PWD Posts In Open Competition: Supreme Court Meritorious Reserved Candidates Can Claim Unreserved Horizontal Vacancies Based On Merit: Supreme Court Employee Not Entitled To Gratuity Until Conclusion Of Both Departmental And Criminal Proceedings: Supreme Court Stamp Duty Recovery Against Legal Heirs Is Strictly Limited To The Extent Of Inherited Estate: Allahabad High Court Single Lathi Blow On Head During Sudden Altercation Amounts To Culpable Homicide Under Section 304 Part II IPC, Not Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Habeas Corpus Maintainable For Child Custody Against Father; Cannot Be Dismissed Merely Due To Alternate Remedy: Allahabad High Court "Plea Of Ignorance In Digital Era Inexcusable": Punjab & Haryana HC Imposes Rs 10K Cost On Accused For Hiding Prior Bail Dismissal Discrepancies In Name And Age On Monthly Pass Fail To Establish 'Bona Fide Passenger' Status In Railway Accident Claim: Delhi High Court "Last Seen" Theory A Weak Link If Time Gap Is Wide: Bombay High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Life For Murder Failure To Conduct Pre-Anaesthetic Check-Up Prima Facie Amounts To Gross Medical Negligence Under Section 304A IPC: Kerala High Court Gujarat High Court Bans AI From Judicial Decision-Making, Lays Down Strict Policy for Court Use of Artificial Intelligence

Supreme Court Affirms the Right of Multiple Consumers to File Joint Complaints under Consumer Protection Act

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On May 15, 2023, In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court upheld the rights of multiple consumers to join together and file joint complaints under the Consumer Protection Act. The ruling, delivered by a bench comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice M.M. Sundresh, clarified the provisions relating to the filing of complaints by consumers and their representatives.

Court referred to earlier decisions, including the case of Brigade Enterprises Ltd. v. Anil Kumar Virmani (2022) 4 SCC 138, which emphasized that a joint complaint can be filed by a few consumers with the same interest, even if it is not on behalf of or for the benefit of numerous consumers. The court rejected the argument that the use of the term "a consumer" in Section 2(5)(i) excludes more than one person, pointing out that Section 2(5)(vi) recognizes the rights of legal heirs or legal representatives in case of a consumer's death.

The court further held that the word "consumer" in singular form, as used in the Consumer Protection Act, should also be understood to include the plural form. It emphasized that the Act allows for joint complaints and does not prohibit consumers with a common interest from joining together to file a single complaint. The court also noted that the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act are in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law, including the Code of Civil Procedure.

Supreme Court set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeals, directing the National Commission to hear the matters on merits expeditiously.

Date of Decision: May 15th, 2023

Alpha G184 Owners Association  vs Magnum International Trading Company Pvt. Ltd.    

 

Latest Legal News