VENKATESWARA RAO JAMMU Vs. GOVERMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The relief sought for in the writ petition is as follows:

(2.) Petitioner submits that he filed CC.No.8 of 2019 before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (for short 'the State Commission ') in the year 2019. The said case is coming for evidence of the opposite party. In the meantime, an order dated 27.11.2019 was passed in IA.No.864 of 2019 in CC.No.8 of 2019 against the Opposite Party No.2. Aggrieved by the said order, the Opposite Party No.2 filed an appeal before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short 'the National Commission ') on 14.01.2020, FA.No.8 of 2020 and the same is pending.

(3.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the grievance of the petitioner is that no orders are being passed in CC.No.8 of 2019 and the said case is being adjourned beyond three months. Since January 2020, there is no progress in the case. He further states that there is non-compliance of Sections 38(7), 49(1) and 52 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (for short 'the Act ') by the State Commission as well as the National Commission, which are expected to dispose of a complaint within a period of three months as per Sections 38(7) and 49(1) of the Act, and an appeal within a period of 90 days as per Section 52 of the Act. Referring to Section 52 of the Act, which stipulates that no adjournment shall ordinarily be granted by the State Commission or the National Commission unless sufficient cause is shown and reasons for grant of adjournment recorded in writing, it is contended that the State Commission and the National Commission are acting in contravention of the provisions of the Act by adjourning the complaint and the appeal respectively, beyond three months, due to which, the matters are being dragged on for years together, thereby frustrating the object and the purpose of the Act.