High Court sets aside NCDRC order, emphasizes Consumer Protection Act procedures.

The High Court set aside the NCDRC's order directing the CEO to file an affidavit and appear via video conferencing, emphasizing adherence to the Consumer Protection Act's procedures. The Court allowed a director's affidavit as sufficient and deemed the CEO's personal appearance unnecessary. Settlement discussions were to involve a senior executive in the absence of a CEO. The petition was disposed of, granting the respondent the right to challenge the order. The judgment underscored the importance of following statutory procedures and avoiding unnecessary actions in complaint adjudication.

---

---

Issues:
1. Impugning an order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) directing the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the petitioner company to file an affidavit and appear in person through video conferencing.

Analysis:
The High Court addressed the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the NCDRC's order directing the CEO of the petitioner company to file an affidavit and appear via video conferencing. The petitioner had already submitted a reply to the complaint within the specified timeframe. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the NCDRC's directive was unnecessary as an affidavit, signed by a director of the company, had already been filed. The Court noted that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, outlines a specific procedure for complaint resolution. While appreciating the NCDRC's intent for settlement, the Court emphasized adherence to the Act's procedures. Consequently, the High Court set aside the NCDRC's order, directing the NCDRC to proceed with adjudication based on the Act's provisions. The additional affidavit submitted by a director would be accepted, and the CEO's personal appearance was deemed unnecessary.

The Court agreed with the petitioner's counsel that, given the absence of a CEO, settlement discussions directed by the NCDRC should be conducted by a senior executive of the company. The High Court disposed of the petition and related applications. It also allowed the respondent to approach the Court in case of any grievances with the order since it was passed in their absence. The judgment highlighted the importance of following statutory procedures in complaint adjudication, emphasizing that the NCDRC should adhere to the Act's framework and not require unnecessary actions, such as the personal appearance of individuals who are not currently holding specific positions within the company.

---