In a significant judgment Jammu and Kashmir High Court on Monday ruled that it has the jurisdiction to hear all pending appeals against the orders of erstwhile J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
While deciding three appeals filed separately by National Insurance Company, Oriental Insurance Company and a complainant Sajad Ahmad Malik against an order of the State Consumer Commission, a division bench of Justice Ali Muhammad Magrey and Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul first considered its jurisdiction over the appeals.
After hearing the parties, the bench held that it has reached an “undisputable conclusion” that all the appeals or pending proceedings arising out the cases decided by the Consumer Commission would be heard by the High Court.
“All the pending proceedings/appeals arising out of the orders or awards passed by the erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission are to continue to be heard and decided by this Court as if the un-amended provision/ Act is still in force,” the Court said.
The court however made it clear that all the fresh proceedings related to consumer complaints as well as the appeals shall be dealt with as per the mode and method prescribed in the newly changed scheme of law in the UTs of J&K and Ladakh, the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as provided in the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019.
While advocate N H Khuru who represented Oriental Insurance Company raised the objection that the Court had no jurisdiction to hear such appeals, Advocate J A Kawoosa, on behalf of National Insurance Company Ltd and advocate Hakim Suhail Ishtiaq on behalf of the complainant Sajad Ahmad Malik however countered him.
After hearing the arguments, the Court allowed the appeals filed by the two insurance companies against the order of State Consumer Commission whereby it had awarded Rs 15 lakhs in favour of the complainant.
The court however dismissed the appeal by the complainant. “We are of the view that the Commission was in error in allowing the complaint filed by the complainant,” the bench said.
The two Insurance Companies had challenged the order before the High Court. The Complainant had also challenged the order and sought directions for paying Rs 30 lakhs.
In their appeal the insurance companies said on 24 September 2002 the house of the complainant was gutted during an operation by security forces against militants. They said the complainant lodged claim with insurance companies and after investigation the companies rejected his claim on the ground that policy of insurance was void as he had suppressed the facts. He filed complaint with erstwhile State Consumer Commission.