Case Note & Summary
The Cuffe Parade Sea Lord Co-operative Housing Society and three of its office bearers filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court under its ordinary original civil jurisdiction challenging the jurisdiction of the District Forum, Jodhpur constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Respondent No.1, a member of the society, had filed a complaint before that Forum alleging deficiency in service because the society was preventing him from using his flat for commercial purposes. The society contended that the flat was located in Bombay and the entire cause of action arose there; the flat was meant for private residence as per the government lease and society bye-laws, and the member had agreed to abide by these restrictions. The complaint was filed in Jodhpur mala fide, suppressing material facts, and an ex-parte interim order was obtained on the very same day directing the society to permit commercial use and to accept related payments, with a threat of imprisonment and fine under section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. The High Court examined the complaint and found that no part of the cause of action arose in Jodhpur; the flat, the society, the bills, and the effect of the society‘s action were all in Bombay. The filing in Jodhpur was therefore an abuse of process meant to snatch an order behind the society’s back. The Court further held that the dispute was essentially between a member and a co-operative society regarding the use of the flat, which falls under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and not the Consumer Protection Act. Consequently, the writ petition was made absolute, the proceedings before the District Forum, Jodhpur were quashed, and respondent No.1 was directed to pay costs of Rs. 15,000 to the society.
Headnote
A) Consumer Law – Territorial Jurisdiction of Consumer Forum – Cause of action – Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Where the entire cause of action arose in Bombay (flat location, society registration, bills), filing in Jodhpur was mala fide and an abuse of process, and the District Forum at Jodhpur lacked territorial jurisdiction. Held, the complaint and proceedings before District Forum, Jodhpur are without jurisdiction and quashed. (Paras 9, 11)
B) Consumer Law – Applicability of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Dispute between member and co-operative society – Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 – A dispute between a society member and the society regarding the permitted use of a flat is governed by the Co-operative Societies Act and does not fall within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Held, the complaint was not maintainable under consumer law. (Para 10)
C) Consumer Law – Abuse of Process – Ex-parte Interim Orders – Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Where a complainant suppresses material facts and obtains an ex-parte interim order with penal consequences at a distant forum without notice and without urgency, it constitutes abuse of process. Held, the interim order passed without notice was unwarranted and liable to be set aside. (Paras 6-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the District Forum, Jodhpur had territorial jurisdiction to entertain a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 when the entire cause of action arose in Bombay, and whether the dispute between a member and a co-operative housing society regarding use of a flat is a consumer dispute.
Final Decision
The petition is made absolute in terms of prayers (a), (b) and (c). The proceedings before the District Forum, Jodhpur are quashed. Respondent No.1 is directed to pay costs of Rs.15,000 to Petitioner No.1 within four weeks.
Law Points
- consumer dispute
- territorial jurisdiction
- cause of action
- co-operative society dispute
- mala fide filing
- abuse of process
- ex-parte interim order
- residential use restriction
- territorial nexus
- entire cause of action in Bombay
- no jurisdiction of District Forum
- Jodhpur
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (01) 166
WRIT PETITION NO.3310 OF 1991
Mr. Shyam Mehta for the Petitioners, None for the Respondents
The Cuffe Parade Sea Lord Co-operative Hsg. Society Ltd. & Ors.
Shri Satishchandra Agarwal & Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum, Jodhpur and seeking quashing of complaint and interim order therein.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of the complaint dated 14.10.1991 and all proceedings before the District Forum, Jodhpur under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and setting aside of the ex-parte interim order.
Filing Reason
Respondent No.1 (a member) filed a consumer complaint in Jodhpur alleging deficiency in service by the society in preventing him from using his flat for commercial purposes, contrary to an alleged agreement; the society contended the flat was only for residential use, the entire cause of action was in Bombay, and the complaint was mala fide.
Previous Decisions
On 14.10.1991, the District Forum, Jodhpur passed an ex-parte interim order directing the petitioners to allow respondent No.1 to use the flat for commercial purposes, accept payments for commercial use, and threatened penal consequences under section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act in case of non-compliance.
Issues
Whether the District Forum, Jodhpur had territorial jurisdiction when the entire cause of action arose in Bombay?
Whether a dispute between a cooperative housing society member and the society regarding use of a flat is a consumer dispute under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners contended that the entire cause of action arose in Bombay and the Jodhpur Forum had no territorial jurisdiction.
Petitioners submitted that the dispute was between a member and the society governed by the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, not the Consumer Protection Act.
Petitioners argued that the complaint was filed mala fide to obtain an ex-parte interim order behind their back and suppressed material facts.
Respondent did not appear to contest the petition.
Ratio Decidendi
A consumer forum lacks territorial jurisdiction if the entire cause of action arises outside its territorial limits, and filing in a distant forum with no nexus is mala fide and an abuse of process. A dispute between a member and a co-operative housing society concerning the permitted use of a flat, governed by the lease, bye-laws, and the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, does not fall within the scope of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Judgment Excerpts
No part of the cause of action of the dispute had arisen in Jodhpur. The entire cause of action has arisen in Bombay.
The dispute is clearly one between a member and the society and is therefore governed by the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. We are unable to see how the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act apply in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
The complaint and the application for interim reliefs was also mala-fide, with a view to snatch the order behind the Petitioner’s back.
Procedural History
Respondent No.1 filed a consumer complaint on 14.10.1991 before District Forum, Jodhpur alleging deficiency in service by the society in preventing commercial use of the flat. On the same day, an ex-parte interim order was passed directing the society to permit commercial use and imposing penal consequences under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. The petitioners filed Writ Petition No.3310 of 1991 before the Bombay High Court challenging the jurisdiction of the District Forum and seeking to quash the complaint and interim order. The High Court heard the matter on 13.01.2005 and allowed the petition, quashing the proceedings and imposing costs.
Acts & Sections
- Consumer Protection Act, 1986: Section 27
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960: Not specified
