Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Sheela Sanjay Sharma, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, seeking to quash the filing and registration of Miscellaneous Application No. 79 of 2010 and the framing of charge dated 21.3.2011 by the Presiding Officer of the Additional Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Nagpur. The respondents were Smt. Vidya Rajendra Shende and the Presiding Officer. The proceedings arose from a judgment and order dated 22.1.2010 passed by the Forum in Complaint No. 198 of 2009, which led to execution proceedings. The petitioner argued that the proceedings were bad in law. The Court, after hearing the petitioner's counsel (Mr. S.G. Shukla) and noting that none appeared for the respondents, examined the maintainability of the petition. The Court referred to Section 28 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, which provides protection to Members of the District Forum, State Commission, or National Commission for any action taken in good faith, barring suits, prosecutions, or other legal proceedings against them. The Court also noted Section 27A of the Act, which provides for appeals from orders of the District Forum to the State Commission, and further appeals to the National Commission and Supreme Court. The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable because the Consumer Forum is not a tribunal subject to the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, and the petitioner had an alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 27A. Additionally, Section 28 barred legal proceedings against the Presiding Officer for acts done in good faith. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - Consumer Forum Proceedings - The petitioner sought to quash execution proceedings and framing of charge by the Additional Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum. The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable as the Consumer Forum is not a tribunal subject to the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, and Section 28 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 protects forum members from legal proceedings for acts done in good faith. (Paras 1-3) B) Consumer Protection Act - Protection of Action Taken in Good Faith - Section 28 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - The Court noted that Section 28 bars any suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings against Members of the District Forum, State Commission or National Commission for executing any order or for anything done in good faith under the Act. The petition against the Presiding Officer was therefore not maintainable. (Para 2) C) Consumer Protection Act - Appeal Remedy - Section 27A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - The Court observed that an appeal under Section 27A lies from any order passed by the District Consumer Forum to the State Commission, and further appeals lie to the National Commission and Supreme Court. The petitioner had an alternative remedy by way of appeal, which was not availed. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable to quash proceedings pending before a Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, and whether Section 28 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 bars such proceedings against the Presiding Officer.
Final Decision
The Court dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable, noting that the Consumer Forum is not a tribunal subject to Article 227, and the petitioner had an alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 27A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Additionally, Section 28 of the Act bars legal proceedings against forum members for acts done in good faith.
Law Points
- Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 not maintainable against proceedings before Consumer Forum
- Section 28 of Consumer Protection Act
- 1986 bars legal proceedings against Members of District Forum for acts done in good faith
- Appeal remedy under Section 27A of the Act
