TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (5) TMI 960
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., P.H. Parekh, S.C. Sharda, K.C. Dua, Tarun Dua, Y.P. Mahajan, L.N. Rao, Roy Abraham, Ms. Baby Krishnan, Tara Chandra Sharma, Ms. Sushma Suri and S. Uday Kumar Sagar for the appearing parties. JUDGMENT 1. All these civil appeals are being disposed of by this common order. It is clarified that at this stage this Court is not going into the facts of any case but is only dealing with the propriety of the procedure followed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ('Commission') in all these matters. 2. With the Industrial Revolution and Development in the International Trade and Commerce, there has been a substantial increase of business and trade, which resulted in a variety of consumer goods appearing in the market to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is irresistible that the Commissions under the Consumer Protection Act do not have the jurisdiction to refer the dispute for a consensual adjudication and then make the said decision of the so-called consensual arbitrator, an order of the Commission itself. Even if there exists an arbitration clause in an agreement and a complaint is made by the consumer, in relation to certain deficiency of service, then the existence of an arbitration clause will not be a bar to the entertainment of the complaint by the Redressal Agency, constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, since the remedy provided under the Act is in addition to the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Now let us see what procedure has been adopted by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y a consensual adjudication which will be binding on both parties. The award of Mr. Justice Tulzapurkar will be sent to this Commission after the arbitration proceedings are completed so that final orders in the matter may be passed by this Commission in accordance with the terms of the said award. We request Mr. Justice Tulzapurkar to enter on the reference at his earliest convenience and to complete the proceedings of adjudication preferable within a period of three months from the date of his entering on the reference. Both the parties will be at liberty to adduce all their oral and documentary evidence in the course of the adjudication proceedings. Post this case after receipt of the original award from Mr. Justice Tulzapurkar." 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....out hereafter shows/suggests that that has not happened. 6. In all these matters awards have been given by the persons to whom the matters were referred. In some of these matters one or other of the parties filed objections to the award. In some cases objections were not filed and/or were not allowed to be filed. In all theses cases the objections have not been considered and the Commission has proceeded to pass orders based on the Award. For sake of convenience the order passed in Civil Appeal No. 2500 of 1994, which is typical of orders passed, is reproduced hereinbelow :- "The dispute between the parties forming the subject matter of this complaint petition was referred for consensual adjudication to Justice Sri V.D. Tulzapurkar, f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... made a decree of a Court. But that is under the provisions of the Arbitration Act and not de hors the Act. As seen above the Commission is referring matters to third persons for consensual adjudication de hors the Arbitration Act. It is then making those awards the rule of the Court by passing orders based on the award. The Commission is not applying its own mind or adjudication on the disputes. It is merely putting its impremanitive on decisions given by third parties. By doing this it is abdicating its own functions and duties. Such a procedure is unwarranted and unjustified. It cannot be allowed to continue. Accordingly the Commission is directed to forthwith discontinue with such a practice. 8. The question then arises as to what is....