JS Murthy (none) 28 June 2014

Ncdrc forgot section 19a and regulation rule 11

NCDRC ignoring Section 19A of the Act while disposing Appeals. It also doesn't interpret Rule 11 of the regulation rule 11 ( Regulation rules 2005), seriously. Costs have to be applied for every adjournment based on the value of the case and minimum has to be Rs 500 for adjournment; where sufficent reason is noticed , it can be lowered to Rs 100. When no costs are awarded the reasons have to be explictly recorded.

Find how NCDRC gave adjounments in FA/734/2007.

-Regulation Rules 2005 --------------------------------------------------

11. Adjournment.-(1 ) Every proceeding before a Consumer Forum shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and as per the requirements of the Act.

(2) The Consumer Forum shall record the reasons for any adjournment made by it.

(3) The cost of adjournment, if asked by the opposite party or parties, shall not be less than five hundred rupees per adjournment and could be more depending upon the value and nature of the complaint as may be decided by the Consumer Forum.

(4). The complainant, appellant or petitioner, as the case may be, may also be burdened with cost unless sufficient cause is shown for seeking adjournment:

Provided that in the circumstances of a particular case, the amount of cost imposed may be less than five hundred rupees but in no case less than one hundred rupees.

(5) The cost imposed may be given to the other party or parties to defray his or their expenses or be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Account to be maintained by the respective Consumer Forum, as the Consumer Forum may order.

(6) If any adjournment is granted without awarding cost, the order sheet shall mention the reasons thereof.

(7) All orders adjourning the matter shall be signed by the President and members constituting the Bench and not by the Court Master or Bench Clerk.

(8) Non-availability of a lawyer who is representing the party shall not be a ground for seeking adjournment of the matter unless absence is beyond the control of the lawyer such as his sudden illness or bereavement in the family.

Reply Follow

2 Replies

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate) 29 June 2014

You are right that the NCDRC as per the provisions of Section 19A of the Consumer Protections Act, 1986 has to dispose the appeal as expeditiously as possible. You may note with concern that due to practical difficulties, the Commission may not be able to dispose of the appeal within the stipulated time owing to many constraints including non availability of members/quorum and other chief reasons. If there is an inordinate delay and the intentions appear to dilatory tactics of the opposite side, you may make a representation before the Commission in this regard in writing and seek relief.

JS Murthy (none) 21 July 2014

Mr. Kalaiselvan ,

Are you aware of Regulation Rule 11 ( 2005 regulation rules) of the Consumer Protection Act? It deals with mandatory Costs for adjournments. Are the Forums and Commissions not guilty of not sticking to this rule? Section 19A expects a mention to be made in the order if the appeal exceeds 90 days. Is that being followed by the Commissions? Regulation rule 11 is a very thought out rule to bring a close to cases in 90 days. Costs a must for reducing pending cases. Consumer cases are taking same time as civil cases in regular courts. Is it not a shame to Consumer Law ?

J S Murty