MANOHAR INFRASTRUCTURE AND CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED versus SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA AND ORS.

MANOHAR INFRASTRUCTURE AND CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED versus SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA AND ORS.

Pre-deposit of 50% of the amount awarded by the State Commission is mandatory for the National Commission to entertain an appeal under Section 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019; however, the National Commission has the power to grant a conditional stay requiring deposit of the entire decretal amount or any amount higher than 50% while staying a State Commission order, provided it gives cogent reasons and issues a speaking order after considering facts and giving opportunity to parties; orders imposing full-deposit conditions must not be passed mechanically.

Parties
Appellant (builder): Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Private Limited; Appellant (in Related Appeals): TDI Infrastructure Ltd.; Respondents (original Complainants): Sanjeev Kumar Sharma and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against Orders of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (stay Applications Remanded)
Outcome
Appeals partly allowed; impugned stay orders of the National Commission set aside as mechanically passed and matters remanded to National Commission to decide stay applications afresh.
Legal Topics
Pre Deposit, Stay of Orders, Conditional Stay, Speaking Order, Remand
Consumer Protection Civil Procedure Pre Deposit Stay of Orders Conditional Stay Speaking Order Remand

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Private Limited

Appellant (builder)

TDI Infrastructure Ltd.

Appellant (in Related Appeals)

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma and Ors.

Respondents (original Complainants)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against Orders of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (stay Applications Remanded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether under Section 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 the National Commission can, while considering a stay application, direct deposit of the entire decretal amount or any amount higher than 50% of the amount awarded by the State Commission
  2. 2 Whether pre-deposit of 50% is mandatory for the National Commission to entertain an appeal under Section 51
  3. 3 Whether the National Commission must record reasons/speaking order when imposing a condition to deposit entire or more than 50% while granting stay

Ratio Decidendi

Pre-deposit of 50% of the amount awarded by the State Commission is mandatory for the National Commission to entertain an appeal under Section 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019; however, the National Commission has the power to grant a conditional stay requiring deposit of the entire decretal amount or any amount higher than 50% while staying a State Commission order, provided it gives cogent reasons and issues a speaking order after considering facts and giving opportunity to parties; orders imposing full-deposit conditions must not be passed mechanically.

Court Disposition

Appeals partly allowed; impugned stay orders of the National Commission set aside as mechanically passed and matters remanded to National Commission to decide stay applications afresh.

Orders

  • The respective I.A.(s) in the appeals restored to the file of the National Commission for fresh decision on the stay applications
  • National Commission to pass fresh speaking/reasoned orders on the stay applications after giving opportunity to parties and considering observations of this Court