SUBHECHHA WELFARE SOCIETY versus M/S. EARTH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.

Citation: [2020] 3 S.C.R. 811 · Decided: 14-02-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR · Disposal: Directions issued
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
811
[2020] 3 S.C.R. 811
811
SUBHECHHA WELFARE SOCIETY
v.
M/S. EARTH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
(Civil Appeal Nos.9961-9962 of 2017)
FEBRUARY 14, 2020
[MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR AND
R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.]
Consumer Protection Act, 1986: s.12 – Recognised consumer
association – Composite complaint filed by a registered welfare
society on behalf of more than one consumers having grievance
that they booked units with the opposite party on different dates
and inspite of making major payment, possession was not delivered
to them – Complaints dismissed on the ground that recognised
consumer association can file complaint on behalf of single
consumer only but cannot file complaint on behalf of several
consumers in one complaint – On appeal, held: s.12(1)(b) r/w
Explanation to s.12 envisages that voluntary registered association
can file a complaint on behalf of its members to espouse their
grievances – There is nothing in the said provision of the Act which
restrict its application to the complaint pertaining to an individual
complainant – Impugned order is, therefore, set aside and matter
remitted to NCDRC for consideration afresh.
Allowing the appeals and remitting the matter to NCDRC,
the Court
HELD: 1. The finding of the NCDRC that recognised
consumer association can file complaint on behalf of a single
consumer, but cannot file complaint on behalf of several consumers
in one complaint, is erroneous and there is no legal basis for
that. A reading of Section 12(1)(b) of the Act read with Explanation
to Section 12 is clear that voluntary registered association can
file a complaint on behalf of its members to espouse their
grievances. If a recognised consumer association is made to file
multiple complaints in respect of several consumers having a
similar cause of action, that would defeat the very purpose.
[Para 7][813 F-H; 814-A]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
812
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 3 S.C.R.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 9961-
9962 of 2017.
From the Judgment and Order dated 06.12.2016 of the National
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at New Delhi in Complaint
Nos. 1196 and 1197 of 2016 and order dated 05.01.2017 in R.A. Nos.
312 and 313 of 2016.
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 9959-9960 of 2017.
Basava Prabhu S. Patil, Sr. Adv., Ashwani Kumar, S.P. Kamrah,
Ms. Iti Sharma, Ms. Peeha Verma, Puneet Sharma, Rajesh Mahale,
Shivendra Dwivedi, Syed Faizan Ali, Ms. Tejaswini Misra, Rachit Batra,
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Rohit Vats, Daya Krishan Sharma, Anoop Kr.
Srivastav, Shivkumar Gavalkar, R.N. Pareek, Vipin Kumar Saxena,
Shailesh Madiyal, Sudhanshu Prakash, Kartik Anand, Advs. for the
appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
R. SUBHASH REDDY, J.
1. These civil appeals are filed by the complainant in Consumer
Complaint Nos.1196 and 1197 of 2016, aggrieved by the order dated
06.12.2016 and the order dated 05.01.2017 in R.A.Nos.312 and 313 of
2016 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
(for short, ‘NCDRC’), New Delhi.
2. The appellant-complainant is a registered Welfare Society.
Consumer Complaint No.1196 of 2016 has been filed by the complainant
on behalf of 8 allottees and Consumer Complaint No.1197 of 2016 has
been filed by the complainant on behalf of 12 allottees with the allegations
that buyers booked units with the opposite party on different dates and
inspite of making major payment, possession has not been delivered to
them. In the aforesaid complaint directions are sought against the opposite
party to hand over possession of units in all respects or in the alternative
to provide other flat of identical size or to refund the amount deposited
along with interest and compensation.
3. It is the case of the appellant that the complainant being a
society registered under Haryana Registration and Regulation Act has
filed complaint on behalf of allottees, under Section 12(1)(b) of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Act’).
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
813
4. Both the complaints filed by the appellant-complainant are
dismissed vide impugned order dated 06.12.2016 on the ground that
recognised consumer association can file complaint on behalf of single
consumer only, but cannot file complaint on behalf of several consumers
in one complaint. Review applications preferred against the dismissal of
the complaints have also been dismissed vide order dated 05.01.2017
which order is also under challenge.
5. We have heard Sri Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel appearing
for the appe
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.