NCDRC BAR ASSOCIATION REGD Vs. DAVINDER MALHOTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRIMA facie, it appears that the State Commission forgets that, in addition to the appellate and revisional jurisdiction under Section 24-B of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as the National Commission for brief) is having supervisory jurisdiction over consumer fora in the country. This should be remembered by the State Commission before commenting that the orders passed by the National Commission are not binding to the Delhi State Commission. Hence, unless there is a contrary judgment by the Apex Court, the State Commission is bound to follow the decision rendered by the National Commission. Further, if there are conflicting decisions rendered by the National Commission, the State Commission may decide the matter appropriately accepting one or the other judgment.

(2.) FURTHER , the State Commission must remember that constitution of Bench before the National Commission is absolutely within the jurisdiction of the President of the National Commission and the Benches are to be constituted on the basis of power conferred under Section 20 of the Act. The State Commission has no business to interfere and criticize whether the constitution of Bench is justified or not.

(3.) REGISTRY is directed to call for the record of this matter from the State Commission.