How to File for Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC: Delhi Resident Guide

Litigants often tend to believe that any adverse order is open to challenge before NCDRC. But that’s not how consumer law works. Consumer law has defined mechanism for appeal, revision and review of orders. While the party aggrieved by an interim direction may find the order as unjust, the displeasure of an order does not grant the right to seek revision.

The question requires an analysis of order passed, the underlying proceedings, opportunity of being heard, documents placed on record before commission and the material impact of such direction. As mentioned in the above article, the grievances which are challengeable before NCDRC would essentially concern that,

• whether the State Commission has wrongly exercised its jurisdiction,
• failed to exercise jurisdiction or
• has committed material irregularity within the meaning of statute.

Why Does an Interim State Commission Order Create Problems for Litigants?

Consumer cases now deal with disputes ranging from builder-buyer conflicts, insurance claims, banking issues, medical services complaints, defective goods, deficiency in services and more. An interim order that has been passed in these cases may seem interim in nature, however the effect of this order follows till the disposal of litigation.

An interim order may restrict a consumer from placing his documents, producing evidence or placing a proper reply to the issues/defences raised by the opposite party. A company/builders/insurance company/banks may also have similar trepidations where they are slapped with an interim order that restricts their right to defend, carry on the proceedings or place their record.

This gets trickier because consumer disputes as a matter of course continue at the State Commission even if one of the parties files a petition for revision at NCDRC. Merely filing a revision petition against an interim order does not act as an injunction on the continuation of proceedings or stoppage of operation of the order under challenge.

The challenge leaves the party precluded from the operations of the order struggling to handle two simultaneous proceedings that are interconnected. We have had many customers believe and approach Advocate BK Singh with the thought process that once a challenge is filed before NCDRC, the proceedings before State Commission automatically come to a halt. This notion in itself is the problem and poses major procedural complications. The consumer case will proceed as usual until an order is passed to stay the operation of the proceedings.

Quick Facts About Challenging an Interim Consumer Commission Order

What Is the Core Legal Problem Behind an Interim Order Challenge?

An interim order means any order by which direction is given in the course of proceedings before the consumer dispute has been finally decided. This may include orders relating to discovery and producing documents, modification of claims or defenses, directing parties to opportunities for hearing, jurisdictional issues, restitution applications, etcetera.

Issue: The issue with this definition is that the prefix β€œinterim” doesn’t clarify whether an order is significant or not. Certain interim orders only address the day-to-day management of a case. Other interim orders can seriously impact a party’ ability to prove its claims and defenses.

An order granting a continuance could be considered standard but an order limiting what evidence can be presented would not. Both of these orders would be considered interim orders during the course of a proceeding, but the legal implications of each are very different. The challenge is distinguishing whether the order was issued in the normal course of managing a case or because of an abuse/discretion of statutory jurisdiction.

Text: As defined by the document, Advocate BK Singh analyses if the order was issued in the normal course of discretion or if it was an abuse that involves statutory jurisdiction.

Why Can’t Every Unfavourable Interim Order Be Taken to NCDRC?

Appearing before NCDRC one frequently hears consumer litigants approaching the forum for a second bite of the cherry to argue the dispute afresh. Revisional proceedings are not de novo like an appeal.

Suppose a party is highly dissatisfied with the approach adopted by the State Commission. It could have reasoned differently on the facts before it. However, revisional intervention by NCDRC is generally confined to particular issues of law relating to exercise of jurisdiction.

The problem occurs when a revision challenges an order only on the basis of one party’s version of how the order is incorrect without pointing out any defect in the exercise of jurisdiction. Questions as to maintainability of such revisions have been raised.

BK Singh sees this issue very often where parties mistake an order going against them as one which has suffered from a jurisdictional defect. No order can be more upsetting than one where a person’s money, business reputation or rights as a consumer are at stake. However, the legal nature of that order is what matters.

Problems Related to Jurisdictional Error and Material Irregularity

Confusion Between Wrong Decision and Jurisdictional Mistake

State Commission can pass an order which one party might feel to be wrong. However, every wrong order doesn’t necessarily becomes jurisdictional defect.

Difference between jurisdictional errors in deciding factum and jurisdictional errors while exercising jurisdiction would arise. Revisional petition is not ordinarily intended to enable the appellate court to try all issues afresh which were disputed between parties.

Many arguments tend to get complicated because the parties are concerned with the result rather than with the process by which the order is made.

Difficulty in Establishing Material Irregularity

Material irregularity is not every kind of procedural inconvenience suffered by a party to a proceeding. He may complain that he was aggrieved by the rejection of an application by him, by restrictions on his evidence, or by the non acceptance of a request made by him.

But then the surrounding circumstances, the record of hearing and the reasons given in the order made are read along with it.

A complaint that natural justice was violated also has to be read along with the entire proceedings. A party may complain that he was not heard while the record of case may reveal earlier chances given to him, notice served or non appearance of the party himself.

It is difficult not the complaint of some error but to prove what was exactly not done.

Why Do Parties Confuse Appeal, Revision and Review?

Ignorance about difference between remedies is a common theme

Appeal is different from revision which again is different from review. Appeal lies for re examination of the case within the parameters of law. Revision being narrower in its scope lies essentially for jurisdictional errors, illegal exercise of jurisdiction, failure to exercise jurisdiction or material irregularity. Review has altogether a different ambit and lies for reconsideration only as may be permitted by statue.

If a party chooses to exercise the wrong remedy at first, then an objection may be raised at the registry stage or later during the hearing. In the meantime precious time will be lost and the consumer proceedings below will continue.

β€œAs is seen many people who prefer to knock the doors of a higher forum considering the gravity of their grievance without caring to analyse the nature of the order passed by the lower forum.” says Advocate BK Singh.

What Practical Difficulties Arise During the Pending Challenge?

Appealing before NCDRC can lead to several procedural complications. Proceedings are ongoing at the State Commission. The compliance direction may still be active unless stayed by another order. Dates for hearing may keep getting allocated even while the party is appealing the interim direction.

Another issue pertains to keeping track of a complete record. The party may focus on the interim order itself but the supporting documents usually tell the real story.

Reviewing the order sheet, applications, replies and documents submitted as evidence along with the hearing history can uncover information that isn’t apparent on the face of the interim direction.

An incomplete record can lead to a misunderstanding of what the dispute is really about. The subject matter of the challenge could seem very different when considered in light of the full history of proceedings.

Documents That Highlight the Nature of the Legal Problem

Documents which are typically relevant include –

Often just by reading the documents it becomes clear whether the appeal is pertaining to a bona fide procedural grievance or if the petitioner is simply not happy with the result. For instance, an order may seem like it denied a party an opportunity, but on referencing the hearing notes it may be seen that the party was given multiple opportunities. Another order may seem like it was passed without any reasoning, but if you read the connected applications you may understand the rationale behind the order.

When Does This Matter Require Professional Legal Assessment?

Legal analysis kicks in where an interim order seriously prejudices the rights of a party to be heard, adduce evidence on a material issue or to call any matter or exercise any procedural right.

Especially where one does not know whether to proceed by way of appeal, revision or some other remedy as the remedy may land you into further trouble.

BK Singh will review the order as well as the pleadings, the history of the hearing and documents supporting such to evaluate the legal position in the matter. We analyse rather than promise you a sure-shot outcome, attempting first to comprehend what wrong the order has created.

How NCDRC Proceedings Become Complex for Parties

Appeals before NCDRC : Learn scope of Revision is very Limited. You cannot simply argue that some other decision was also possible. Question is whether State Commission has acted within the scope of its powers conferred by law.

Party might be uncertain about Notice/Maintainability/Interim protection/filler/continuation. All depend upon facts of each case.

Advocate BK Singh analyzes interplay of Interim order & the underlying consumer dispute. We need to find the real legal issue instead of throwing every adverse order to be.catchall for revision.

Frequently Asked Questions

Final Thoughts

An interim order passed by State Commission can lead to significant procedural predicaments in consumer matters. The issue is not whether someone likes the order or not but whether the order gives rise to any legally recognisable grievance in the limited scope that is available at NCDRC.

Consumer matters entail close reading of orders and records and procedural developments as they happen. BK Singh guides his clients through the process and narrows down his client's assessment to the extant facts and legal position.

Information contained in this article is for general informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal advice. All matters are fact dependent.