Case nº Appeal No. 14/15/777 Of 2004, (Against the Order dated 09/12/2003 in Complaint No. 218/2003 of the State Commission Orissa) of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, November 22, 2011 (case 1. Central Electricity Supply Co. Of Orissa Ltd. (Cesco) and Anr. w. Executive Engineer (Electrical) Central Electricity Supply Utility Of Orissa (Ormerly Cesco), Cutack Vs Cosboard Industries Ltd)
| Judge | For Appellant: Mr. R.K. Mehta, Adv. and For Respondents: Mr. R.S. Biswas & MR. S. Pattjoshi, Advocate |
| President | Mr. V. R. Kingonkar, Presiding Member and Mr. Vinay Kumar, Member |
| Resolution Date | November 22, 2011 |
| Issuing Organization | National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
All these three appeals are being disposed of together in view of single legal question involved and for the reason that the same is being treated as a preliminary objection on the jurisdictional issue. The three complaints which were filed on 25.9.2003, 20.10.2003 and 30.9.2003 by the concerned complainants involved in these appeals were obviously filed after the amendment of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The amended provision was brought on the book w.e.f. 15.3.2003. The legal question involved is whether due to the amendment which came into force on 15.3.2003, the State Commission had the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint or had no jurisdiction in view of the fact that the cause of action had arisen prior to the amended provisions. The three complaints stated above emanate from commercial transactions. There is no dispute about the fact that the service provider is made liable due to deficiency in service even in respect of the commercial transactions between the parties after the amendment of Section 2(i)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The amendment may be reproduced for ready reference as follows: d) "consumer" means any person who (i) XXXXX (ii) hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promsed, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who ’hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purposes; It is explicit that the amendment of sub-clause (ii) came into force w.e.f. 15.3.2003. It is but natural that the question as to whether the services availed by a person for any commercial purposes prior to such amendment would fall within the domain of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is required to be addressed. Perusal of the order dated 8.4.2011 rendered by the 3-Member Bench of this Commission in OP NO.286 of 2000, OP No.300 of 2000 and OP No. 315 of 2000...
To continue reading
Request your trial