Appeals in Consumer Cases with Supreme Court Guidelines and Landmark Cases

By Dhruva Vig

An Appeal may be referred to as “a proceeding undertaken to have a decision reconsidered by a higher authority; especially, the submission of a lower court’s or agency’s decision to a higher court for review and possible reversal.”^[1]

Such appeal may lie in consumer disputes as well, where a court of competent authority shall hold the power to intervene and effectuate justice. The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter as the Act) has been enacted for supervising such matters, with the objective ‘to provide for protection of the interests of consumers and for the said purpose, to establish authorities for timely and effective administration and settlement of consumers’ disputes and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”^[2] This also includes the provision of filing and hearing of appeals before a Consumer forum or any court of competent authority, albeit matters relating to consumer disputes only.

Legal Provisions

A.) Under the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, Order XXIV has laid down the provision of “Appeals under Section 23 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986”. These are a set of guidelines issued by the Court which shall serve as the modus operandi for filing and entertaining of appeals before the Supreme Court.

It provides that any petition of appeal from an order made by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘The National Commission’) under sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of Section 21 of the Act, shall being subject to the provisions of Sections 4, 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963, be presented before the Court by an aggrieved person within a period of thirty days from the date of the order sought to be appealed against, provided upon the condition that for computing the said period, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of such order shall be excluded from such computation.

It also provides that such petition of appeal shall before the Court shall recite succinctly and clearly all the relevant facts leading up to the order appealed from in such petition, and shall set forth in brief the objections to the order appealed from, and the grounds relied upon in support of such appeal before the Court. The petition shall also state the date of the order appealed from in its contents, as well as the date on which it was received by the appellant who is party to such case.

The petition of appeal before the Supreme Court shall be accompanied by:

(i) a genuine/authenticated copy of the order appealed from;

(ii) one spare set of the petition and of the accompanying papers of such dispute, at the time of filing of the appeal, and when the matter is re-filed after removing the defects/objections, the Advocates-On-Record of relevant case, or Parties/Persons appearing-in-person before the Court, shall submit at least three sets of paper books to such Court, along with set of original papers so attached, with the declaration that the paper books are complete in all respects;

(iii) a Bank draft for a sum of rupees fifty thousand rupees or fifty per cent of the amount whichever is less in the relevant case, is required to be paid by the person intending to appeal before the Court, in terms of the order of the National Commission, and is to be drawn in favour of the Registrar, Supreme Court of India, payable at New Delhi.

After the said appeal is registered, it shall be put up for hearing ex parte before the Court which may hold the power to either dismiss it summarily or direct issue of notice to all necessary parties/persons, or may make such orders as the circumstances of the case may require.

The Supreme Court rules also provide that a fixed Court fee of Rs 5000 shall be payable on the petition of appeal under this order.^[3]

In Consumer disputes, the amount so deposited by the appellant before the Court, in terms of the provisions of clause (iii) of Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, will remain in the Suitors’ Fund Account till the disposal of the appeal has been said to be complete, or till such time as the Court may direct from time to time in relevant cases.

If the appeal has been allowed by the Court in such Consumer dispute, then the amount deposited by the appellant would be refunded to him without any interest levied upon it, but if the said appeal has been dismissed, the same will be allowed by the Court to be withdrawn by the respondent of the relevant case, or may be disbursed as per the direction of the Court in that behalf with respect to the circumstances of such case.

Save as otherwise provided by the rules contained in this order 24 of Supreme Court Rules, the provisions of other orders under the Supreme Court Rules shall apply so far as may be, to appeals filed under Section 23 of the Act.

B.) Under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, several sections have been provided relating to filing and hearing of appeal by any person/party having any grievance relating to a consumer dispute. These are:

Section 24 talks about ‘Appeal’, where any person who is aggrieved by any order passed by the Central Authority under Sections 20 and 21 may file an appeal to the National Commission (NCDRC), within a limited time period of thirty days from the date of receipt of such order of the Commission by such aggrieved person.

In the case of C.V. Ratnam vs Union Of India And Ors.^[4], the Andhra High Court has observed that Section 23 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (corresponding to the Section 67 of that Act) provides the scope for a limited appeal to the apex court from an order which has been made by the National Commission i.e., when the same has been executed in the exercise of its original power/authority.

Also, in the case of M/s Ambience Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus Ambience Island Apartment Owners & Ors.^[5], the apex court observed that having regard to Section 23 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (corresponding to the Section 67 of the Act) an Appeal will not hold any ground before the Court if the NCDRC has already passed the order in the course of execution proceedings.

Section 52 talks about ‘hearing of appeals’, where an appeal which has been filed before the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, shall be heard/entertained as expeditiously as possible, and every endeavour shall be made by the relevant Commission to dispose of the said appeal within a fixed period of ninety days from the date of its admission before the relevant consumer forum, provided, that no such adjournment of any nature shall ordinarily be granted by the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, unless there is sufficient cause is shown by the party, and the reasons for grant of such adjournment to an appeal have been recorded in writing by such Commission.

It is also provided further under the Act that the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, shall make such orders as to the costs occasioned by the adjournment of appeals, as may be specified by regulations relating to consumer disputes.

It has also been provided under the Act that in the event of an appeal being disposed of after the period so specified in relevant cases, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, shall record in writing the reasons for the reason of being disposed of after the period so specified was over, at the time of disposing of the said appeal.

Section 67 talks about ‘Appeal against order of National Commission’, where any person who is aggrieved/affected by an order which has been made by the National Commission in exercise of its powers which have been conferred under sub-clause (i) or (ii) of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 58^[6], may hold the option to prefer an appeal against such order of the relevant Commission to the Supreme Court within a period of thirty days from the date of the order, provided that the Supreme Court may entertain such an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if the Court is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing such appeal within the prescribed time period. It has also been further provided under the Act, that no appeal, by any person who is required to pay any amount in terms of an order of the National Commission, shall be entertained by the Supreme Court unless that person has made the deposit of fifty per cent of that amount of such dispute in the manner as may be prescribed.

It is, however, important to note that the Appeal to the Supreme Court does not arise from the order of National Commission, if the order has already been passed by National Commission in an appeal from the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

Also, an Appeal from the order of the National Commission cannot be appealed to the Supreme Court if the former has declared the order in the course of execution proceedings under Section 71 of the Consumer protection Act. Thus, under the provisions of Section 67, the Appeal from order of National Commission can only be filed in instances of grievances and unfair contracts where the value of goods and services exceeds the amount of Rupees 10 Crores.

However, in cases where an Appeal from the order of National Commission does not hold any ground, the person aggrieved by the order of the National Commission can always approach the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution.

Section 73 of the Consumer Protection Act talks about the provision of “Appeal against order passed under Section 72”, where an order is passed under sub-section (1) of Section 72^[7], an appeal shall lie before the Commission, both on facts and on law, and not withstanding anything that is contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, from:

(a) The order which has been made by the District Commission to the State Commission;
(b) The order which has been made by the State Commission to the National Commission; and
(c) The order which has been made by the National Commission to the Supreme Court.

Except in cases as provided under sub-section (1), no appeal shall lie before any court, from any order of a District Commission or a State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be. Also. every appeal which has been filed under Section 73 before any Commission, shall be preferred within a period of thirty days from the date of order of a District Commission or a State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be.

Provided, on the condition, that the State Commission or the National Commission or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, may entertain an appeal before such forum, after the expiry of the said period of thirty days has been said to be complete, and if the Commission is satisfied with the reasons that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the said period of thirty days, before the relevant forum.

C.) Rule 17 of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions) Rules, 2020 talks about the “manner of depositing amount in appeals before Supreme Court”, where if an appeal has been filed before the Supreme Court under section 67, the amount to be deposited by the appellant, as provided in the second proviso to that section under the Act, shall be remitted in the form of a crossed Demand Draft which shall be drawn on a nationalised bank in the favour of the Registrar, Supreme Court, payable at New Delhi.

Landmark Judgements

Trans Mediterranean Airways v. Universal Exports & Anr.^[8]

Held: Consumer Protection Act, 1986 aims to protect interests of consumers and to provide for speedy resolutions of disputes with regard to defective goods or deficiency of service. Framework of the 1986 Act was provided by Resolution of General Assembly of United Nations Organisation dated 9-4-1985, also known as Consumer Protection Resolution.

HVPNL V. Mahavir^[9]

Held: The issue of improper disposal of appeal was brought up, where the duty of appellate forum was reiterated. Supreme Court, upon noticing that State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana had been disposing cases by passing orders in a routine fashion without referring to the material on record and without giving any reasons therefor, deprecated such improper disposal of cases, and held that the appellate forum is bound to refer to the pleadings of the case, submissions of counsel, necessary points of cases, discuss the evidence and dispose of the matter by giving valid reasons.

Bijoy Sinha Roy v. Biswanath Das^[10]

Held: The Act provides for protection of interests of consumers in form of quick and speedy redressal of grievances. Act further provides for additional remedies and it is not in derogation of any other law. As National Commission has control over all Consumer Fora under S. 24-B of Act, it was requested to develop mechanism for speedy relief to consumer. Also, usage of videoconferencing facility recommended in case of expert witnesses under Evidence Act, 1872 – S. 45.

Tarachand Jain v. Sir Ganga Ram Hospital & Anr.^[11]

Held: The findings recorded by National Commission that the appellant complainant had failed to establish its allegations of negligence do not suffer from any infirmity to warrant interference Appellant claiming that negligent severing of his urinary sphincter during prostate surgery in R-1 Hospital had led to his incontinence. However, the court further held that the pivotal documents do not in any way substantiate appellant’s case. The proceedings under 1986 Act are not akin to that of a suit, though some provisions of CPC are pressed into service as a part of fair procedure.

Dhanbir Singh v. Haryana Urban Development Authority^[12]

Held: “The Consumer Protection Act was enacted to provide for better protection of the interests of consumers and for establishment of Consumer Forums and other authorities for the settlement of consumer disputes and for matters connected therewith,”

Indian Medical Association v. V. P. Shantha & Ors.^[13]

Held: The Court, in this landmark judgement, held that any “service rendered to a patient by a medical practitioner (except where the doctor renders service free of charge to every patient or under a contract of personal service), by way of consultation, diagnosis and treatment, both medicinal and surgical, would fall within the ambit of ‘service as defined in Section 2(1)(0) of the Consumer Protection Act.”

TRAI Foods Ltd. v. National Insurance Co. & Ors.^[14]

Held: The court established that the quantity of claim, nature of claim, nature of evidence required in respect of claim and damages suffered, and nature of legal issues should be considered in such cases. Further held that the Consumer Forums have been set up to grant speedy remedy and are not meant to duplicate the civil courts, and subject the litigants to delays.

Y C. Venkatachalam v. Ajitkumar C. Shah^[15]

Held: The Court noted that “the declared objective of the statute was “to provide for better protection of the interests of consumers”. It seeks to provide a speedy and inexpensive remedy to the consumer. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is one of the benevolent social legislations intended to protect the large body of consumers from exploitation. The Act has come as a panacea for consumers all over the country and is considered as one of the most important legislations enacted for the benefit of the consumers. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides inexpensive and prompt remedy.”

“The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is dedicated, as its Preamble shows, to provide for effective protection of the rights of the consumers. According to the Statement of Objects and Reasons, it seeks to provide speedy and simple redressal to consumer disputes. The object of the Act is to render simple, inexpensive and speedy remedy to the consumers with complaints against defective goods and deficient services and for that a quasi-judicial machinery has been sought to be set up at the District, State and Central levels. The Consumer Protection Act has come to meet the long-felt necessity of protect g common man from wrongs for which the remedy under the ordinary law for various reasons has become illusory.”

State of Uttar Pradesh (through Principal Secretary) & Ors. v. All Uttar Pradesh Consumer Protection Bar Association^[16]

Held: The court heard the appeal where it was made aware of the poor organisational set-up, grossly inadequate infrastructure, absence of adequately trained manpower, lack of transparency in selection process, absence of criteria of selection process, anomalous situation, that were arising from service conditions of members of Consumer Fora.

The Court issued directions to frame rules by order dated 21-11-2016 in All U.P. Consumer Protection-Bar Assn.^[17], to Union Government, State Governments and to National Commission, as provided in Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and for the perusal of proposed Rules and Regulations was also reiterated by the Court.

References

Supreme Court Rules, 2013.pdf (sci.gov.in)

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019 (indiacode.nic.in)

How to draft an appeal under Section 67 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – iPleaders

Civil Appeal format Consumer Protection Act section 23 for Supreme Court of India| Appeal from NCDRC (aaptaxlaw.com)

Art of Drafting of Appeal for filing of Appeal before CIT (Appeals) (taxguru.in)

All you need to know about Consumer Protection Laws in India – iPleaders

1. Black’s Law Dictionary (9^th ed.), pg. 112 “Appeal” ↑
2. Consumer Protection Act, 2019 [Act 35 of 2019] ↑
3. Supreme Court Rules, 2013, Third Schedule “Table of Court Fees” – Part II : Appellate Jurisdiction, Entry 8 – “Petition of Appeal under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Rs. 5000” ↑
4. 2001 (6) ALD 35 ↑
5. Civil Appeal Nos. 1213-1215 of 2017 ↑
6. Section 58 – Jurisdiction of National Commission ↑
7. Section 72 – Penalty for non-compliance of order, ↑
8. (2011) 10 SCC 316 : (2012) 1 SCC (Civ) 148 : (2011) 4 CPJ 13 (SC) ↑
9. (2001) 10 SCC 659 : AIR 2000 SC 3586 (1) ↑
10. (2018) 13 SCC 224 : (2018) 4 SCC (Civ) 149 : 2017 SCC Online SC 1101 ↑
11. (2005) 13 SCC 648 ↑
12. (2013) 11 SCC 472 : (2014) 1 SCC (Civ) 586 : (2012) 3 CPJ 1 (SC) ↑
13. (1995) 6 SCC 651 : AIR 1996 SC 550 ↑
14. (2004) 12 SCC 656 : Civil Appeal No. 6756 of 2002, January 31, 2003 ↑
15. (2011) 9 SCC 707 : (2011) 4 SCC (Civ) 835 : (2011) 3 CP) 33 (SC) paras 33, 34 ↑
16. (2018) 2 SCC 225 ↑
17. (2017) 1 SCC 444 ↑