38.6c New Delhi, India, Saturday, April 13, 2024

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against NCDRC Orders In An Execution Proceeding U/S 23 Of COPRA [READ ORDER]

By Saransh Awasthi      03 September, 2020 01:56 PM      0 Comments
Supreme Court NCDRC Orders

In yet another landmark judgment, the Supreme Court has held that any appeal before the apex court against an order which has been passed in the course of execution proceedings by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) is not maintainable.

A bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and K.M. Joseph referred to the Karnataka Housing Board vs K.A. Nagamani (2019) where the court had made a distinction between execution proceedings and original proceedings and held that the former are separate and independent. Subsequently, the court dismissed the appeal filed before it stating, "In our view, having regard to Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, an appeal will not lie to this court against an order which has been passed in the course of execution proceedings. The appeals are hence dismissed as not being maintainable."

The appeal was filed against the NCDRC order dated 03.11.2015. The order had directed M/s Ambience Infrastructure Private Limited, who is the appellant in the present case, to pay the complainants 70% of the maintenance charges from November 2002 with interest at 9 % per annum within 90 days or else pay at an enhanced rate of 12 % per annum. This order was passed in the Execution Petition.

The Apex court observed that an appeal under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 is maintainable against an order which has been passed by the NCDRC on a complaint where the value of the goods or services and compensation claimed, if any, exceeds the threshold which is prescribed.

According to the new Consumer Protection Act, 2019, any person, aggrieved by an order made by the National Commission in the exercise of its powers conferred by sub-clause (i) or (ii) of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 58, may approach the Supreme Court against such order within a period of thirty days from the date of the impugned order. 



Share this article:

Leave a feedback about this

Trending Legal Insiders
Two-day conference on April 13-14 on Technology and Dialogue between SC and Singapore

Explore AI's role in law at the India-Singapore Supreme Court conference on technology, enhancing judicial processes and access to justice, April 13-14, 2024.

12 April, 2024 06:16 PM


Trending Judiciary
Very disturbed by latest trend of lawyers commenting on pending cases: CJI

Chief Justice of India urges lawyers to prioritize court and Constitution over political beliefs, expressing concern over trend of commenting on pending cases.

08 April, 2024 11:19 AM
Trending Judiciary
Court rejects plea for interim bail to BRS leader K Kavitha

Delhi court rejects interim bail plea for BRS leader K Kavitha in money laundering case related to Delhi liquor scam. ED opposes bail.

08 April, 2024 12:14 PM
Trending Judiciary
Centre questions growing tendency among States to approach SC for funds

The Centre questions the growing trend of states approaching the Supreme Court for funds, citing timing and advocating for resolution through dialogue.

08 April, 2024 03:58 PM
Trending Judiciary
SC notice to Centre on plea to safeguard interests of intersex children

Supreme Court issues notice to Centre on PIL for safeguarding intersex children's interests and regulating medical interventions. Details inside.

08 April, 2024 04:35 PM


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email