Legal Question in Consumer Law in India

in continuance with my yesterday's question with regard to maintainability of a case in the consumer forum when oter party has already filed a recourse petion u/s 34 of the arbitration act ,i would like to our legal expert to please clarify the point in view of the supreme court judgement vide civil appeal no-92 of 1992 passed on11-12-2003 which confirms that sec 34 of the arbitration act is not a bar for consumer forum in view of sec -3 of the consumer protection act-1986

SALIENTS POINTS OF THE ABOVE SAID SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 11-12-2003--CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT -1986-SEC-3 =REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO AN AGGRIEVED PARTY UNDER THE 1986 ACT ARE WIDER -PROVISIONS OF 1986 ACT SHALL BE IN ADDITION TO AND NOT IN DEROGATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE-WHERE THE STATUTE GIVES A FINALITY TO THE ORDERS OF SPECIAL TRIBUNALS ,THE JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURTS MUST BE EXCLUDED IF THERE IS ADEQUATE REMEDIY TO DO WHAT THE THE CIVIL COURT WOULD NORMALLY DOIN A SUIT WHERE THERE IS EXPRESSED BAR OF JURISDICTION OF THE COURT ,AN EXAMINATION OF THE SCHEME OF THE PARTICULAR ACT TO FIND THE ADEQUACY OR SUFFICIENCY OF THE REMEDIES PROVIDED MAY BE RELEVANT BUT IS NOT DECISIVE TO SUSTAIN THE JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT -MERELY BECAUSE RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES ARE CREATED UNDER THE ACT AND FORUMS ARE PROVIDED ,IT CANNOT TAKEAWAY OR EXCLUDE THE JURISDICTION CONFERRED ON THE FORUMS UNDER THE 1986 ACT -HOWEVER IN CASE OF CONFLICT ,IT IS FOR THE FORUM UNDER THE 1986 ACT TO LEAVE THE PARTIES EITHER TO PROCEED OR AVAIL THE REMEDIES BEFORE OTHER FORUMS PARA -10,123,18,&19

UNDER PARA 14-LAST OF THE SAID SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT ,IT IS QUOTED THAT IT WOULD THEREFORE BE CLEAR THAT THE LEGISLATURE ,BE CLEAR THAT THE LEGISLATURE INTENDED TO PROVIDE A REMEDY INADDITION TO THE CONSENTIENT ARBITRATION WHICH COULD BE ENFORCED UNDER THE ARBITRATION ACT OR THE CIVIL ACTION IN A SUIT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE .THEREBY AS SEEN,SEC-34 OF THE ACT DOES NOT CONFER AN AUTOMATIC EMBARGO ON THE EXERCISE OF THE POWER BY THE JUDICIAL AUTHORITY UNDER THE ACT .IT IS A MATTER OF DISCRETION CONSIDERED FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE ,WE HOLD THAT THOUGH THE DIST,FORUM ,STATE COMMISSION AND NATIONAL COMMISSION ARE JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEC-34 OF THE ARBITRATION ACT AND BY OPERATIONOF SEC-3 THEREOF ,WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE THAT THESE FORUMS CREATED UNDER THE ACT ARE AT LIBERTY TO PROCEED WITH THE MATTERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONSOF THE ACT RATHER THAN RELEGATING THE PARTIES TO AN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO A CONTRACT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PARTIES. THE REASON IS THAT THE ACT INTENDS TO RELIEVE THE CONSUMERS OF THE CUMBERSOM ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS OR CIVIL ACTION THE FORUMS OF THEIR OWN ON THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF A PARTICULAR CASE ,COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE APPROPRIATE FORUM FOR ADJUDICATIONM OF THE DISPUTES WOULD BE OTHERWISE THOSE GIVEN IN THE ACT --EMPHASIS SUPPLIED

NOTE IN MY SPECIFIC CASE ,THE CONCERNED SHARE BROKER HAS FILED MISC PETITIONU/S 34 OF THE ARBITRATION ACT .THE ABOVE QUOTED JUDGEMENT ALSO CONFIRMS THAT SEC-34 OF THE ARBITRATIONACT IS NOT A BAR FOR THE CONSUMER FORUM WHICH MEANS THAT THE CASE DECIDED BY HON'BLESUPREME COURT OF INDIA WAS CONNECTED WITH SEC-34 OF THE ARBITRATION ACT .NOW BASED ON ABOVE FACTS WHETER MY QUOTED CASE IS MAINTAINABLE IN THE CONSUMER FORUM OR NOT.

1 Answer from Attorneys

Related Questions & Answers

More Consumer Law questions and answers in India

Looking for something else?