Anil K. Jain & ANR.
Vs. Delhi Development Authority  INSC 224 (6 February 2009)
JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.761 OF 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.15179 of
2007) Anil K. Jain and Anr. ...Appellant(s) Versus Delhi Development Authority
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel
for the appellants.
In spite of service
of notice, nobody has appeared on behalf of the respondent to contest the
prayer made in this appeal.
The appellants filed
a complaint before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi,
[for short, `the State Commission'], claiming total compensation to the tune of
Rupees thirty five lakhs and four thousand. The State Commission, instead of
deciding the complaint on merits, transferred the same to the District Forum,
as in its opinion, the amount of compensation was astronomically high. That
order has been confirmed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
[for short, `the National Commission']. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
In our view, the
State Commission was duty bound to consider the merits of the claim made by the
appellants and decide the same after giving opportunity of adducing evidence
....2/- -2- to the parties and hearing them. It was not at all justified in
transferring the complaint to the District Forum on an assumed ground that the
amount of compensation claimed was astronomically high. The National Commission
also committed serious error by approving the legally unsustainable order
passed by the State Commission.
appeal is allowed, impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted to
the State Commission to decide the complaint afresh after giving opportunity of
hearing to the parties.