ASHISH HANDA, ADVOCATE versus HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AND ORS.

ASHISH HANDA, ADVOCATE versus HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AND ORS.

Substantial compliance with the proviso to Section 16(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act was proven, as the Chief Justice of the High Court considered various names and gave consent for appointment before the appointment was made.

Parties
Petitioner: Ashish Handa; Respondents: Hon'ble the Chief Justice of High Court of Punjab and Haryana and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Transferred Case (c) No. 15 of 1994 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Appointment of President of State Consumer Commission, Statutory Interpretation of Section 16(1)(a) and Section 20(1)(a) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Consumer Protection Appointment of President of State Consumer Commission Statutory Interpretation of Section 16(1)(a) and Section 20(1)(a) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashish Handa

Petitioner

Hon'ble the Chief Justice of High Court of Punjab and Haryana and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Transferred Case (c) No. 15 of 1994 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appointment of President of the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission complied with Section 16(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Ratio Decidendi

Substantial compliance with the proviso to Section 16(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act was proven, as the Chief Justice of the High Court considered various names and gave consent for appointment before the appointment was made.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • The transferred case is dismissed.