National Commission has given two conflicting judgments. The same National Commission observed in Revision Petition No. 2916 of 2008 — NCDRC Bar Association (Regd.) vs. Davinder Malhotra & Ors. as under: “if there are conflicting decisions rendered by the National Commission, the State Commission may decide the matter appropriately accepting one or the other judgement.” The decision is reproduced below.
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
REVISION PETITION NO. 2916 OF 2008
(From the order dated 4.4.08 in Appeal No.183/07 of the State Commission, Delhi)
NCDRC Bar Association (Regd.) … Petitioner
Versus
Davinder Malhotra & Ors. … Respondents
BEFORE :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.B. SHAH, PRESIDENT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. GUPTA, MEMBER
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.C. JAIN, MEMBER
For the Petitioner : Mr.R.P. Bhatt, Sr.Advocate with
Mr.J.B. Mudgil, Advocate
18.07.2008
O R D E R
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, 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 judgement 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 judgement.
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.
In view of the above, Notice to the parties returnable on 28th August 2008.
Meantime, observations made by the State Commission in the impugned order are stayed because it may lead to indiscipline and insubordination with other consumer fora.
Registry is directed to call for the record of this matter from the State Commission.
……………………………….J.( M.B. SHAH)
PRESIDENT
………………………………J.(K.S. GUPTA)
MEMBER
……………………………….J.(R.C. JAIN)
MEMBER
/sra/ 1 / Court-1