CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and Commissions(2002) 01 NCDRC CK 0044

D.K.M.B. And CO. vs ASHOK VISHWANATH JADHAV

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 9 January 2002 · Citation: 2002 2 CPJ 217

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.S.Rane , V.K.Data J.
RESULT
Revision Application dismissed

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 371 words
1.

WE are proceeding to dispose of this revision at the stage of admission itself. Appellants herein are the original O.P. Nos. 1 and 2 and respondents 1 to 145 are the original complainants. Rest of the respondents are the original O.Ps. in the aforesaid complaint.

2.

THE applicants herein have filed this revision against the order dated 4.7.2001 of that Forum 1 declining the prayer of the applicants to decide, the preliminary issue of jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. We have perused the application, which is at page No. 11 presented on behalf of the present applicants before the District Forum and hand written order appended thereto by the District Forum declining the request of the applicants.

Although we do not find adequate advertance to the factual aspects as also the legal provisions, we are of the view that conclusion arrived at declining to consider the same as preliminary issue requires to be sustained.

3.

O.P. Nos. 1 to 145 are the original complainants and they have filed common complaint mentioned herein above against the applicants and rest of the O.Ps. inter alia claiming relief that the original O.Ps. be ordered and directed to execute the Registered Sale Deeds and since there is failure on their part to execute the same, compensation of Rs. 10,000/- each be awarded. The objection is taken by and on behalf of the applicants/original O.P. on the ground that the cumulative effect of the total claim liability would exceed the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Forum.

4.

IN this respect we wish to refer to the provisions of Sections 2(1)(b)(iv) and 12(1)(c) and 13 (1)(c) which have been introduced by way of amendment in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in the year 1993 which allows the consumers with common and similar intent to file a complaint in a representative capacity and dispute filed by recourse to the said provisions has to be procured on consideration of individual claim of each of the consumer as distinct and not cumulatively. We are rejecting this revision with expectation that the District Forum will take up the complaint for final disposal in the light of provisions referred to herein above. With this, revision application stands rejected.

Revision Application dismissed.