CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and Commissions

SUBHASH ANAND vs ARUNA DHAND

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 29 January 1991 · Citation: 1992 3 CPJ 560 : 1993 0 CPC 26 : 1993 1 CPR 734 : 1994 1 CLT 278

HON’BLE JUDGES
R.N.Mittal , B.L.Anand , Avtar Pennathur J.
RESULT
Appeal accepted
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 212 words
1.

THIS appeal has been filed against the order of District Forum dated 6.12.89 by the defendant.

2.

IT has been argued by the learned Counsel for the appellant that the order has been signed by only two Members of the Forum out of three Members of the Forum and it is liable to be set aside on this ground. We agree with the learned Counsel. Section 14(2) of the Consumer Protection Act prescribes that every order made by the District Forum under Sub-section (1) shall be signed by all the Members constituting it. From the language of the section it is evident that the order of the Forum should be signed by all the Members In case it is not done the order is liable to be set aside. In the aforesaid view, we are fortified by the observations of the National Commission in M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. V.K. Jain, I (1991) CPJ 50 (NC). (revision petition No. 41/90) decided on 26.12.90.

For the aforesaid reasons, we accept the appeal, set-aside the order of the District Forum and remand the case to the District Forum for deciding the matter afresh with no order as to costs. The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on 18.2.91. Appeal accepted.