ANMATI DEVI Vs. PAWAN AUTOMOBILES & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this Revision Petition, by the Complainant, is to the order dated 12.08.2015, passed by the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Lucknow (for short "the State Commission") in Appeal No. 392 of 2001. By the impugned order, the State Commission has overturned the order dated 25.11.2000, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Kushi Nagar (for short "the District Forum") in Complaint Case No. 451 of 2000. By the said order, accepting the Complaint filed by the Petitioner, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, namely, M/s Pawan Automobiles, the Dealer, and M/s Bhagwan Hire Purchase Ltd., the Financer, Opposite Parties No. 1 and 4 respectively in the Complaint, for taking forcible possession of the vehicle in question by Opposite Party No.1 and delivering its possession to Opposite Party No.4, the District Forum had directed the Opposite Parties to deliver the possession of the seized vehicle back to the Complainant after settling the account with him. By the order impugned in this Revision Petition, instead of going into the merits of the claim made by the Complainant and the correctness of the direction issued by the District Forum, the State Commission has dismissed the Complaint on the short ground that any dispute, arising out of the Hire Purchase Agreement between the Complainant and the Financer, had to be resolved by the process of Arbitration, in terms of the said Agreement between the parties.

(2.) Despite service, all the Respondents remain unrepresented. Accordingly, we have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

(3.) Having perused the documents on record and bearing in mind the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Seeds Corporation Ltd. v. M. Madhusudhan Reddy and Anr., (2012) 2 SCC 506, wherein it has been held that the remedy for redressal of the grievance of a Complainant under the Consumer Protection Act, 1086, is in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force, the order impugned cannot be sustained.