TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Parliament to protect the interest of consumers. Hence, an ouster of jurisdiction cannot be lightly assumed unless express words are used or such a consequence follows by necessary implication. In Emaar MGF Land Ltd. [ 2018 (12) TMI 1940 - SUPREME COURT ], this Court held that the complaint under the Act of 1986 is a special remedy provided to Imperia Structuresa consumer in addition to the remedies that can be availed of by them, including arbitration. In Imperia Structures Ltd. v Anil Patni [ 2020 (11) TMI 189 - SUPREME COURT ], this Court held that the remedies available under the Act of 1986 are in addition to the remedies available under other statutes, including special statutes like the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 RERA . In the present case, the existence of an arbitral remedy will not, therefore, oust the jurisdiction of the consumer forum. It would be open to a consumer to opt for the remedy of arbitration, but there is no compulsion in law to do so and it would be open to a consumer to seek recourse to the remedies which are provided under the Act of 1986, now replaced by the Act of 2019. The insertion of the expression telecom services ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncreased to ₹ 2,800 for the bill which was generated on 8 December 2013. The respondent has denied undertaking excessive use of the connection, including towards internet facilities. It was alleged that as a prevalent practice, the mobile service provider must intimate the customer when the bill reaches 80 percent of the credit limit. The complaint contains a recital of the steps which were taken by the respondent by contacting the representatives of the appellant following which he registered a complaint on 22 December 2013. The respondent instituted the consumer complaint on 25 May 2014 seeking compensation in the amount of ₹ 22,000 together with interest, besides consequential reliefs. 3. The appellant raised an objection to the maintainability of the complaint based on a judgment of a two-Judge Bench of this Court in General Manager, Telecom v. M Krishnan and Another (2009) 8 SCC 481 . The District Forum dismissed the application and directed that a written statement must be submitted by the appellant on all issues including on the issue of jurisdiction. It was observed that the appellant, a private service provider is not a telegraph authority for the purpose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 7B of the Act of 1885 ousts the jurisdiction of the consumer forum under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 Act of 1986 . 6. Section 11 of the Act of 1986 specified the jurisdiction of the District Forum. Section 11(1) provided as follows: 11. Jurisdiction of the District Forum.-(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed does not exceed rupees twenty lakhs. 7. In terms of Section 11(1), the District Forum was conferred with the jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed did not exceed a stipulated amount. The amount was progressively revised from ₹ 1 lakh to ₹ 5 lakhs and eventually to ₹ 20 lakhs. The expression service is defined in Section 2(o) in the following terms: 2 (o) service means service of any description which is made available to potential users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (a) the right to be protected against marketing of goods which are hazardous to life and property; (b) the right to be informed about the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard and price of goods to protect the consumer against unfair trade practices; (c) the right to be assured, wherever possible, access to variety of goods at competitive prices; (d) the right to be heard and to be assured that consumers' interests will receive due consideration at appropriate forums; (e) the right to seek redressal against unfair trade practices or unscrupulous exploitation of consumers; and (f) right to consumer education. 11. Section 4 of the Act of 1885 vests the Central government with the exclusive privilege of establishing, maintaining and working telegraphs. The expression telegraph finds its definition in Section 3(1AA). Under the proviso to Section 4(1) the Central Government is empowered to grant a license to any person to establish, maintain or work a telegraph within any part of India. Section 7B contains a provision for the arbitration of disputes and is in the following terms: 7B. Arbitration of disputes.-(1) Except as otherwise expres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... telegraphs, the Act of 1986 is a special (and later) enactment intended to protect the interest and welfare of consumers. Though the present case relates to the period before the enactment of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 Act of 2019 , an important aspect of the matter is that the definition of the expression service in Section 2(42) of the later Act specifically incorporates telecom services Section 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is as follows: - service means service of any description which is made available to potential users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, telecom, boarding or lodging or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service ; 14. The submission which was urged on behalf of the appellant was that the specific incorporation of telegraph services in the Act of 2019 is an indicator that it was only as a result of the new legislation that telecom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctive redressal is made available to consumers. To serve the purpose of the Act, various quasi-judicial forums are set up at the district, State and national level with wide range of powers vested in them. These quasi-judicial forums, observing the principles of natural justice, are empowered to give relief of a specific nature and to award, wherever appropriate, compensation to the consumers and to impose penalties for non-compliance with their orders. 12. As per Section 3 of the Act, as already stated above, the provisions of the Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of any other provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Having due regard to the scheme of the Act and purpose sought to be achieved to protect the interest of the consumers better, the provisions are to be interpreted broadly, positively and purposefully in the context of the present case to give meaning to additional/extended jurisdiction, particularly when Section 3 seeks to provide remedy under the Act in addition to other remedies provided under other Acts unless there is a clear bar. 16. The only distinction in the present case is that where Section 7B of the Act of 1885 appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e question what is the general law and what is the special law and which law in case of conflict would prevail would have arisen and that would have necessitated the application of the principle Generalia specialibus non derogant. The general rule to be followed in case of conflict between two statutes is that the later abrogates the earlier one. In other words, a prior special law would yield to a later general law, if either of the two following conditions is satisfied: (i) The two are inconsistent with each other. (ii) There is some express reference in the later to the earlier enactment. If either of these two conditions is fulfilled, the later law, even though general, would prevail. 39. From the text and the decisions, four tests are deducible and these are: (i) The legislature has the undoubted right to alter a law already promulgated through subsequent legislation, (ii) A special law may be altered, abrogated or repealed by a later general law by an express provisions, (iii) A later general law will override a prior special law if the two are so repugnant to each other that they cannot co-exist even though no express provision in that behalf is found i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings under the Act of 1986 or the RERA. In the present case, the existence of an arbitral remedy will not, therefore, oust the jurisdiction of the consumer forum. It would be open to a consumer to opt for the remedy of arbitration, but there is no compulsion in law to do so and it would be open to a consumer to seek recourse to the remedies which are provided under the Act of 1986, now replaced by the Act of 2019. The insertion of the expression telecom services in the definition which is contained in Section 2(42) of the Act of 2019 cannot, for the reasons which we have indicated be construed to mean that telecom services were excluded from the jurisdiction of the consumer forum under the Act of 1986. On the contrary, the definition of the expression service in Section 2(o) of the Act of 1986 was wide enough to comprehend services of every description including telecom services. 21. For the above reasons, we affirm the judgment of the NCDRC which came to the conclusion that the District Forum has the jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint. 22. The appeal shall accordingly stand dismissed. 23. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Civil Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
