In Civil Appeal No. 4767 of 2019, Vibha Bakshi Gokhale vs M/s Gruhashilp Constructions, the Supreme Court while setting aside the order of NCDRC which had dismissed a complaint on the ground that the complainant failed to file rejoinder and evidence inspite of having been provided additional time, observed that the ground for rejection of the complaint is technical and in disregard of the requirements of substantial justice. The purpose which Parliament sought to achieve by setting up the NCDRC is to protect the rights of consumers to seek access to justice under the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
The court also was critical of the order of NCDRC wherein while not affording any further time to the complainant, the NCDRC observed that it is perhaps because the appellants do not have any merit in the case, that there was a delay in filing a rejoinder and evidence. The Supreme Court further held that that orders of this nature detract from the true purpose for which the NCDRC has been established. The NCDRC should have borne this in mind instead of rejecting the complaint on a technicality. Such dismissals only add to the burden of litigation and defeat the purpose of ensuring justice in the consumer fora
The rules of the Indian Bar Council prohibit law firms from advertising and soliciting work through communication in the public domain. This website is meant solely for the purpose of information and not for the purpose of advertising. GM BOSU & Associates does not intend to solicit clients through this website. We do not take responsibility for decisions taken by the reader based solely on the information provided in the website. By clicking on 'ENTER', the visitor acknowledges that the information provided in the website (a) does not amount to advertising or solicitation and (b) is meant only for his/her understanding about our activities and who we are.
EnterCancel
