PROPRIETOR, MIS. JABALPUR TRACTORS
A
v.
SEDMAL JAINARAIN AND ANR.
OCTOBER 30, 1995
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA JJ.]
B
Consumer Protection Act, 1985 :
Consumer disputes redressal fo1111n-Jurisdiction of-Daim for garage
charges-Suit pending before competent Civil Court-Order of National Con-
C
sumer Dispute Redressal Commission directing to hand over possession of
car to respondem-Held, not justified.
The State Consumer Forum, in respect of a claim for garage charges,
held that it could not consider the claim as the matter was already pending
and was snb-judice before the competent Civil Court However, the Nation· D
al Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum directed to hand over possession
of the car to the respondent. Allowing the appeal of the proprietor of the
Garage, this Court
HELD : The Consumer Protection Act, 1985 is not in derogation of
any other law. In that view of the matter, the National Consumer Disputes E
Redressal Commission was not justified in directing to hand over posses·
sion of the car to the respondent. [562-B)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 9928 of
1995.
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.2.93 of the National Con-
sumer District Redressal Commission, New Delhi in F.A. No. 239 of 1991.
R. Mohan and V.G. Pragasam for the Appellant.
B.K. Satija and Y.P. Dhingra for the Respondent No. 1.
Vishnu Mehra and K.M.K. Nair for the Respondent No. 2.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Leave granted.
•
561
F
G
H
A
B
c
562
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 4S.C.R.
With regard to the claim for Garage charges, C.S. No. 49-B/1990 on
the file of the Illrd Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge,
Jabalpur is pending disposal. The State Consumer Forum had also noticed
it in paragraph 26 of its order and concluded that the amount claimed by
Mis. Jabalpur Tractors as Garage charges is Rs. 18,000 and this cannot be
considered as the matter is already pending and is sub judice before the
competent Civil Court. The Consumer Protection Act is not in derogation
of any other law. In that view of the matter, the National Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission, in the impugned order, was not justified
in directing to hand over possession of the car to the respondent.
The appeal is accordingly allowed and the order of the National
Forum in First Appeal No.239/1991 dated February 18, 1993 in so far as
the Garage charges are concerned is set aside. No costs.
R.P.
Appeal allowed.
,.
Lex