Hi Sir, Do High Courts have any jurisdiction over the Consumer Cases initiated under any section(s) of the Consumer Protection Act -1986(As Amended upto date)? If so, pl. define the prescribed procedural details, and if not why Hon'ble Delhi High Court is exceeding its jurisdiction in the Consumer Matters and the Consumer cases against M/s. Triveni Infrastructure Development Co. Ltd., New Delhi while their jurisdiction (both original and and appellate) exclusively and entirely vests in the Consumer courts (Distt., Forum, State commission and National Commission and finally with the Hon'ble Supreme court. What is the remedy for the hundreds of aggrieved Consumers of the services of the defaulting company who are coerced to take their cases to a Committee Court created by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, even when they have already been decided by the proper and appropriate Consumer Fora. One such case is Execution case No.504 of 2010 u/s27 of CPA -1986 Sandeep Maheshwari Vs. the Developers still pending before the Hon'ble Distt. Forum No. X, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi-110 016 since more than a year?. there could be several such cases as the notorious company has gravely and severely defaulted in providing the necessary services for which they have collected huge sums for their various projects from the hundreds of Consumers. Even vested with the powers of !st Class Magistrate, the Consumer courts for reasons better known to them are shying away from awarding the defaulting company the deterrent punishment and prison term as provided under the Consumer Protection Law
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Finding the company guilty of unfair trade practice for giving a flashy advertisement despite being "well aware that the aforesaid project would never be successful", the New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum also awarded Rs 25,000 as compensation for harassment and Rs 10,000 as litigation costs
"OP (Triveni Infrastructure Development Co Ltd) knowingly and deliberately extracted money from the complainant's pocket through unfair trade practice by publishing in various news papers, 'Path breaking developments in the city of future, Township at Faridabad', as it was well aware that the aforesaid project would never be successful.
"It is totally, unlawful, injustice, malpractice, unfair trade practice of developer (Triveni), which is a violation of Consumer Protection Act, 1987," the forum presided by C K Chaturvedi said.
The order of the forum came on the plea of Kalkaji resident Vivek Kumar who had alleged that he had paid Rs six lakhs in two instalments in 2006 and 2007 for booking a flat in the real estate developer's township project at Faridabad, but even after four long years the status of the township was not communicated to him.
He had alleged that his requests for delivering possession of the flat or failing that, to refund his booking amount, were met with threats and added that the firm did not even reply to any of his emails.
As the company chose not to contest the complaint despite serving of notice, it was proceeded against ex-parte.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
High Courts vis-a-vis Consumer Cases under Consumer Protection Law-Jurisdiction reg.
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
My Blog List
RTI Point of View: How RTI could have prevented the PNB fraud: Shailesh Gandhi - The Right to Information (RTI), used efficiently, could have helped activists and bankers expose irregularities much before they snowballed into full-fledg...3 months ago
- ► 2009 (26)