Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a complaint filed by the appellant before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Supreme Court, upon hearing the arguments, expressed that the complaint was not maintainable. Consequently, the appellant sought permission to withdraw the complaint, which the court granted, allowing the appellant to file a properly constituted suit in a civil court. The court also directed that the time spent in prosecuting the complaint would be excluded from the limitation period if an application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act was filed along with the plaint. The orders of the District Forum, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission were set aside, and the civil appeal was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Consumer Protection - Maintainability of Complaint - Withdrawal of Complaint - Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - The appellant sought to withdraw the complaint as it was deemed not maintainable by the Supreme Court. The court granted permission to withdraw the complaint and allowed the appellant to file a properly constituted suit in a civil court, ensuring that the time spent in prosecuting the complaint would be excluded for limitation purposes. Held that the appellant acted bonafide in prosecuting the case before the consumer fora (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the complaint filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum was maintainable.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appellant to withdraw the complaint and granted liberty to file a properly constituted suit in a civil court. The time spent in prosecuting the complaint was directed to be excluded for limitation purposes.
Law Points
- Withdrawal of complaint
- Limitation Act
- Jurisdiction of consumer fora
