TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 960X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1996, 4049 OF 1996 AND 171 OF 1997 - - - Dated:- 12-5-2000 - G.B. PATTANAIK, DORAISWAMY RAJU AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ. F.S. Nariman, R.F. Nariman, Harish N. Salve, Jitendra Sharma, R. Sunderavaradan, N.N. Goswami, Raju Ramachandran, Bhimrao N. Naik, M.N. Krishnamani, N. Ganpathy, R.C. Mishra, Dr. Meera Agarwal, Ramesh Chandra Mohra, G. Venkatesh Rao, K.V. Mohan, M.K. Dua, Sunil Kapoor, Santosh K. Sethi, R.D. Upadhyaya, Krishan Venugopal, Ms. Bina Madhawan, P.H. Parekh, S.C. Sharda, K.C. Dua, Tarun Dua, Y.P. Mahajan, L.N. Rao, Roy Abraham, Ms. Baby Krishnan, Tara Chandra Sharma, Ms. Sushma Suri and S. Uday Kumar Sagar for the appearing parties. JUDGMENT 1. All these civil appeals are being disposed of by this common order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Commissions, it is indeed difficult to conceive that such Commissions would be authorised to refer the disputes for a consensual adjudication, merely because to arrive at a decision, it would be necessary to take evidence in the proceedings. In the absence of any provision in the Act itself, authorising the Commission to refer a pending proceeding before it, on receipt of a complaint from a consumer, for being settled through a consensual adjudication, the conclusion is irresistible that the Commissions under the Consumer Protection Act do not have the jurisdiction to refer the dispute for a consensual adjudication and then make the said decision of the so-called consensual arbitrator, an order of the Commission itself. Even if there exi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted by a retired Judge who is in Bombay. The records of the case will be transmitted by the Registry to Mr. Justice V.D. Tulzapurkar at his address in Bombay in Samta Building, General Bhonsale Marg, Near Sachivalaya, Bombay. Mr. Justice Tulzapurkar may stipulate the terms and conditions to be completed by the parties as to his remuneration and expenses of the adjudication proceedings. We make it clear that this is not an arbitration under the Arbitration Act, but only a consensual adjudication which will be binding on both parties. The award of Mr. Justice Tulzapurkar will be sent to this Commission after the arbitration proceedings are completed so that final orders in the matter may be passed by this Commission in accordance with the te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w and we consider it an unhealthy practice for Courts/Commission/Tribunal to abdicate their duties and functions and to delegate adjudication of disputes before them to third parties. The adjudication can only be by the concerned Court/Commission/Tribunal. For an effective adjudication the Commission/Court must address itself to the evidence, documents, respective case of the parties, including submission on their behalf and then give a finding on that basis. Facts set out hereafter shows/suggests that that has not happened. 6. In all these matters awards have been given by the persons to whom the matters were referred. In some of these matters one or other of the parties filed objections to the award. In some cases objections were not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... if a party does not abide by the decision then the only remedy would be to file a suit to enforce the agreement of the parties and the decision. There is no provision in law nor could any authority be shown to us, that adjudication of matters before a Court/Commission/Tribunal can be entrusted to a third party/individual and the decision of the third person then made a decree or Order of a Court/Commission/Tribunal. Of course, an Award made by an Arbitrator can be and is made a decree of a Court. But that is under the provisions of the Arbitration Act and not de hors the Act. As seen above the Commission is referring matters to third persons for consensual adjudication de hors the Arbitration Act. It is then making those awards the rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... award or not allowed the parties to file objections. We, therefore, set aside the final orders of the Commission in all these matters and remit all these matters back to the Commission. We direct that the Commission shall permit the parties, who have not filed their objections, to file their objections to the award within a period of 4 weeks from today. Replies, if any, to the objections to be filed within 4 weeks thereafter. The Commission shall then consider the submissions/objections of the respective parties and then give a decision. With this direction all these Appeals stand disposed of. 11. It is clarified that this order will not act as a precedent to reopen matters where parties have accepted or acted upon the final decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
