VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2024 › High Court of Delhi

Dr Brij Rani Pandey v. Electrotherm India Ltd and Anr

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
6 November 2024
Bench
Manoj Jainauthor
Case no.
CM(M) 2684/2024

Follow Delhi High CourtFollow Manoj Jain

Judgment

J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶1The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 04.03.2024 and 02.05.2024 passed by learned National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short "NCDRC") in Appeal No. 304/2020.

¶2The above matter was filed before learned NCDRC impugning order dated 28.07.2021 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh in Complaint No.55/2016.

¶3Since the entire cause of action pertaining to the present subject matter has arisen within the jurisdiction of Allahabad High Court, relying upon judgment dated 04.03.2024 passed by Hon"ble Supreme Court in Siddhartha S Mookerjee vs. Madhab Chand Mitter, Civil Appeal Nos. 3915-16/2024, learned counsel for petitioner prays that the petitioner may be permitted to

CM(M) 2684/2024 2

withdraw the present petition with liberty to approach said jurisdictional High Court.

¶4This Court has gone through the above said order wherein the Hon"ble Supreme Court has, very categorically, observed that merely because NCDRC had allowed petition, the jurisdiction would not vest with Delhi High Court and observing that since the cause of action had arisen in Kolkata and the matter had been dealt with by the State Commission of West Bengal, it was held that the jurisdiction of High Court of Calcutta should have been invoked.

¶5Moreover, this Court has already vide order dated 12.09.2024 passed in General Manager, Punjab National Bank and Others vs. Rohit Malhotra:

(2024) SCC OnLine Del 6415 observed that in view of Siddhartha S Mookerjee (supra), any such petitioner should go to the "jurisdictional High Court".

¶6The petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. Liberty, as prayed for, is granted.

¶7It is, however, made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion, whatsoever, over the merits of the case.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE NOVEMBER 6, 2024/ss

Case details

Parties and counsel

CM(M) 2684/2024 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 06th November, 2024 + CM(M) 2684/2024 & CM APPL. 32348/2024 DR BRIJ RANI PANDEY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, Advocate. versus ELECTROTHERM INDIA LTD AND ANR .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.