LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


(Querist) 13 May 2020 This query is : Resolved 
Is the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 applicable to Proceedings before consumer forums constituted under the Consumer Protection Act 2019
Guest (Expert) 14 May 2020
Certainly it would be applicable though it is not mandatory.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 14 May 2020
please specify the problem.
Hemant Agarwal (Expert) 14 May 2020
1. Evidence Act is not followed in "Summary Trials" which is the norm for Consumer Courts.

Keep Smiling .... Hemant Agarwal
VISIT: www.chshelpforum.com
R.K Nanda (Expert) 14 May 2020
Not applicable in consumer court.
P. Venu (Expert) 14 May 2020
What are the facts? What is the context?
Guest (Expert) 14 May 2020
Refer the Supreme Court Orders -- Statement -- in the Case of Malaykumar Ganguly VS Dr Sukumar Mukherjee and Others --in 2009 --9 SCC- 201 on 7th August 2009 -- The Orders Pronounced by Supreme Court Bench of Honorable Justices S.B.Sinha and Deepak Varma.... The Orders stated " Though the Evidence Act are stated to be non applicable in the Consumer Forum Cases , the Provisions under this Act the FORA are to be followed as Principles of Natural Justice " --- please
Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 14 May 2020
Please state clear material facts of the problem, if any.
Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 14 May 2020
The provisions of Indian Evidence Act are not strictly applicable in Consumer forum, however, the baisc ingredience of the evidence act that it is the complainant, who has to to prove his case at his own evidence, is fully complied with in the fora.
Dr J C Vashista (Expert) 14 May 2020
I fully agree with the opinion and expert advise of Mr Raj Kumar Makkad.
Provisions of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (as amended) is strictly in-applicable in consumer fora.
Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 14 May 2020
Thanks a lot to Dr. J C Vashishatha ji for agreeing with my reply.
KISHAN DUTT KALASKAR (Expert) 15 May 2020
Dear Sir,
I agree with the the opinions of all the experts.
Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 16 May 2020
In absence of material facts, agree with the advice from expert Raj Kumar Makkad and Dr. J.C. Vashishta ji.
A. A. JOSE (Expert) 16 May 2020
I agree with the view expressed by learned experts Mr.Rajkumar and others who made it clear that Evidence Act is strictly in applicable to the consumer fora cases.
Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 16 May 2020
@Expert A. A. Jose

It seems that you missed word 'not' in between strictly and applicable. The provisions of Evidence Act are not strictly applicable in consumer fora.
A. A. JOSE (Expert) 16 May 2020
Thank you dear Rajkumar Makkad ji . Kindly note that I stated that Evidence Act is "inapplicable".
P. Venu (Expert) 16 May 2020
The author has not bothered to provide the details sought. However, as the discussions has much progressed in spite of the author not being interested, the question of non-applicability of the provisions of Evidence Act to the proceedings before the Consumer Forums and Tribunals needs to be understood in the light of proving the evidence vis-a-vis appreciating the evidence. To my knowledge, such quasi-judicial forums and authorities are not bound by the strict rules in former aspect as to documentary as well as oral evidence, but as to the latter aspect there is and there cannot be difference or distinction.
Guest (Expert) 17 May 2020
Dear Querist, Shri Sanjay Shishodia,

To add to your knowledge or to get your query satisfied, could you gather anything meaningful from the contradictory replies of some experts, specifically when one of the experts says, with certainty, that “Certainly it would be applicable though it is not mandatory” on your query about applicability of the Indian Evidence to Proceedings before consumer forums constituted under the Consumer Protection Act 2019,” while the other three Experts have categorically stated that the Act would not be applicable on the proceedings of the Forum?

On the other hand, one of the Experts have shown his agreement with all the experts stating, “I agree with the opinions of all the experts,” i.e., for both the positive and negative replies. Other experts have agreed with one Expert, Shri Rajkumar Makkad.

Not only that, to exert on the positive reply the first Expert, in a bid to scuttle down the negative opinion of the said three experts, tried to raise create more confusion in the issue. He quoted one Supreme Court Judgment, in the name of Manojkumar Ganguly VS Dr Sukumar Mukherjee and Others. But, the fact is that there is no evidence seems to be available on record of the Supreme Court to confirm if any person, named, “MANOJ KUMAR” had ever sued Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee, even till today, what to say of more than 11 years ago, i.e., before the year 2009 of the judgment.

Now, since I have pointed out towards the controversy, you would see some more junk coming out of his brain.
Guest (Expert) 17 May 2020
Hi Mr. Shishodia and the participating Experts,

You may like to note, what I stated has proved correct that "since I have pointed out towards the controversy, you would see some more junk coming out of his brain."

So, not once, but through four continuous posts, he has proved my guess to be true.

The question, arises, if I have stated that "there is no evidence seems to be available on record of the Supreme Court to confirm if any person, named, “MANOJ KUMAR” had ever sued Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee, even till today, what to say of more than 11 years ago, i.e., before the year 2009 of the judgment." his duty was to first find out whether there is any truth in my statement or not. He was required to prove his own statement, if there happened to be any case in the names of MANOJ KUMAR vs. Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee".

But, instead of proving my statement as false, he has made some more controversial statement due to his awfully corrupted mind.
Guest (Expert) 17 May 2020
There is a clear ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court that “Apart from the procedures laid down in Section 12 and 13 as also the Rules made under the Act, the Commission is NOT BOUND by any other prescribed procedure. The provisions of the Indian Evidence Act are NOT applicable. The Commission is merely to comply with the principles of natural justice, save and except the ones laid down under sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the 1986 Act.”

Apparently, as usual, the reply, as well as further junk posts, of the chronic controversy expert, rather the quack Mr. NJS, has proved that he prefers to create confusions and controversies, rather than any correct legal opinion.

His reply has further proved that he has not even understood the basic requirement of the query before writing his answer, as well as even up till now.

Thirdly, it has also been proved that he reads only between the lines, even the very important judgments.

His own replies have proved beyond any doubt that he is an established quack with corrupt mind.

sanjay shisodia (Querist) 17 May 2020
All the respected experts, I would like to thank you all for taking out
your time to answer my query , all of your replies were very helpful and added to my knowledge
sanjay shisodia (Querist) 17 May 2020
Section 2 of the Evidence Act provides that the Act is applicable to all "JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS" in or before any "COURT". So implies that to make the Act applicable in any proceeding, the proceeding must be in a "COURT" and must be a "JUDICIAL PROCEEDING".
According to me proceedings in a consumer forum are judicial proceedings, but the Evidence Act under section 3 defines Court as judges, magistrates and all other persons legally authorised to take evidence .
so according to me the Act will be applicable to consumer forums if these forums amount to court within the meaning of section 3 of evidence Act ?
is this view correct?
and if yes then does a consumer forum is a court within the meaning the section 3 of the Evidence Act/
Guest (Expert) 17 May 2020
"Though the Evidence Act is said to be Non Applicable in Consumer Forums -- The Provisions under this Act the FORA are to be Followed as Principles of Natural Justice " - as Stated by Supreme Court in the case of MalayKumar Ganguly VS Dr.Sukumar Mukherjee on 7th August 2009.
Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 17 May 2020
Mr. Sanjay!

Section 2 of the Evidence Act is applicable to the Courts but the Consumer Forum do not come within the ambit of Courts as defined under Civil Procedure Code so your claim is misconceived.
Guest (Expert) 17 May 2020
Mr . Author / Querist -- Once again Prefer to Repeat though the Evidence Act is said to be Non Admissible Or Acceptable in the Consumer Courts , The Provisions under this Act the FORA would be followed as Principles of Natural Justice.
Guest (Expert) 17 May 2020
Kind Attn the Querist Please -- Evidence in Consumer Forum -- Orders in the Case of Khivraj Motors VS V.Chandrababu on 9th November 2001 --- Salutary guidance which the Consumer Protection Act provides the Principles of Natural Justice.should be complied. Though it is not bound to follow the strict Rules of Code of Civil Procedure like applying the Evidence Act etc the Parties could file the Evidences. Consumer Forum should not stand on any formality and disallow the prayers of filing the Evidences. Ofcourse each case would depend on the facts of the case. There is absolutely No Ban in the provisions of the Act and the Evidences could be brought on the Trial and even the additional Evidences could be brought on record before the State Commission during the Appeal
Guest (Expert) 17 May 2020
Kind Attn Querist ---- Contd --- Basing on similar to above my self had repeatedly said the Provisions under this Act the FORA would be followed as Principles of Natural Justice. as stated by the Supreme Court in the Case of Malay Kumar Ganguly VS Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee on 7th August 2009 the Orders pronounced by Bench of Honorable Justices S.B.Sinha and Deepak Varma. .
Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 17 May 2020
Consumer forum / consumer commission are not courts as defined under evidence act rather alternate forum for redressal of consumer disputes.
Guest (Expert) 17 May 2020
The Recent Last two posts are the Supreme Court Order and other is related to State Commission Consumer Forum ( only the person who reads it completely could understand )
A. A. JOSE (Expert) 22 May 2020
Sorry to note these repeated cheap "Name callings" and branding of legal experts as "lunatics"/"mentally sick"/"fake"/"quack",etc..etc.,and making this forum a "mockery"! Wasting precious time of everyone! How can we stoop so low? It appears that even Covind-19 has not taught us any lesson! Instead of making personal attacks on individuals, perhaps, it is time for us to enrich from others' view points too. Let us all maintain cordial relationships as educated people please.
Guest (Expert) 22 May 2020
Learned Advocate Mr.A.A.Jose your advise is good , acceptable and appreciated but you should understand this Cheat is not an Qualified Advocate and his intention is to only cheat and extort money from the Querists which is confirmed and he is unqualified also.If you have time request your friends or some one to contact him for some case and then up date what had happened. You would be obviously shocked when you understand his modus operandi in cheating. Instead of my self explaining it you please experience it thro your friends or known people please. Here the Query it self is about the Evidences and my self will not commit any thing with out it. Please check the fact as requested please
A. A. JOSE (Expert) 22 May 2020
Mr. N.J.S. Rajkumar ji, My humble request is to calm down and let us STOP this here. Let good sense prevail. If at all there is any genuine grievance against anyone, wise course of action is to take it up directly with the Club Admin rather than resorting to war of words by and between the experts and thereby tarnishing the image of not only this Club but also all legal experts enlisted in this Club. I am sure that all of us are reasonably educated and experienced too. Let us not belittle or hurt others. We should not behave as nursery children. I STOP it here and NOTHING FURTHER PLEASE.
Guest (Expert) 22 May 2020
Learned Advocate Mr.A.A.Jose your advise is appreciated but remember this is for Advocates only here and not for Fake and Un Qualified and always the Fake and Unqualified and Hypocrites would be taught a lesson. and Mr.A.A. Jose you had reopened it as an adviser of Morals but there is no moral could be found in you defending an Hypocrite. If you feel defending the Hypocrite is an action of Person like you then my self would prefer to be Nursery School Child please. Mr.A.A.Jose obviously your advise to make a Complaint is just a Nursery Child's advise.. When I Could handle my self why to make Complaints. Also Remember " Fake only would worry about the Image , the Real would Just Dont Care " Any thing Else ?
Guest (Expert) 22 May 2020
Dear Shri A A Jose,

I appreciate your feelings. But the question arises, who is doing mischief and who happens to misguide the gullible querists, who post their queries in good faith with the hope that they would get correct guidance or advice from the experts?

You can very well observe, his multiples of the posts against any single query are mostly unrelated to the problem question of the querist. That would either confuse or tease the querists, or to taunt or blackmail the experts. Even if he replies to any question, as if legal opinion, but answer is found to be misleading or confusing, if pointed out with correct legal opinion, instead of feeling sorry and admitting his mistake, he would start vomiting garbage out of his brain.

You could also have observed, several of the prominent and learned experts have stopped making any contribution at the LCI. In fact, when persons like him try to dominate the forum and making the opinions of the all the really learned and experienced experts, as suppressed by vague posts, why the experts would try to waste their precious time. Supposedly being jobless, he can easily spare any amount of time, but not all experts can afford to waste their time and get their expert opinion virtually obliterated with multiples of his confusing and extraneous posts.

Earlier, he tried to malign the image of the expert, Mr. Arunagiri, due to his blackmailing tactics. The expert also happened to be a Director of one of the Public Limited Company, from where this fellow is stated to have been thrown out of the employment, probably due to his undying habit of blackmailing of the Directors and employees of that company. Mr. Arunagiri also stopped visiting this site for the last several years.

I also happen to be one of those fellows who discontinued appearing at this site. Earlier, on 30.07.2017, when I appeared on this site, after a long time, THIS FELLOW POSTED A WELCOME MESSAGE at my profile page, as “Welcome- You are back and All the Best.”


You can personally observe the vagaries of his mind from several of the posts, where at some time he welcomes or appreciates an expert, at some other time, he would start misbehaving with him very rudely.

For test sake, if you try to make even slightest of your comment against any of his posts, he would start abusing you also and would not hesitate to declare you also as fake, quack, etc. So, you can imagine, to what extent he can be relied upon by anyone?

Just before a few days back, after a lapse of a period of about last two years, I tried to occasionally visit this site. Even if I try to post my views, this fellow starts making junk posts to malign my image, whereas the fact is that his own credentials are quite doubtful.

FOR EXAMPLE, at the following thread, I asked him some questions about his own real name and other credentials. On visit of the following thread, you can personally observe that even on several requests, he failed to reply even a single one of my questions:

What I asked was:

1) Does he possess LLB Degree, as required to be a practising lawyer?
2) Has he not been struck off from the enrollment of the Bar Council, if so,on what ground?;
3) Is he not a christian with two of the words, "JOSHUA" and SAMUEL", representing his Christian name?
4) If he is Christian, with what aim and object he impersonates himself as if he belongs to the S/C or S/T category?
5) If he is Christian, with what aim and object he has adopted fake non-Christian names like, “Rajkumar” and “Narasimha”, and why he impersonated in the name of Barat Kottarakkara while sending his spam mails to our email ID through the email ID of some third person, "Bruce Charles"?
6) On what specific ground he was thrown out of his lucrative job as a consultant in the company named "Gemima Oiltech (India) Ltd.?
7) Did he not try to blackmail some of the Directors of his employer company? If so, with what of his aim to be fulfilled?”

BUT TILL TODAY, even on several repetitions, he has not replied even a single one out of those questions.

So, far as the fakeness is concerned, I POSED A CHALLENGE ON HIM ON 17.05.2020 on the same thread, as mentioned above that he should send his credentials along with reply to my questions on my email and in turn I would send him the proof of my credentials. BUT, BEING HIMSELF FAKE, HE HAS NOT RESPONDED TO MY MESSAGE.

My Challenge, that appeared on the aforesaid link, reads as follows:
“You can only assume unrealistically, while I have already proved you as merely a blackmailer quack and impersonator.”
“Now take another challenge, you send me the proof in satisfaction of my questions above. After I receive your authentic proof about your credentials and qualifications, I would send proof of my credentials that may help to prove, who is quack, you or me.”
“Come on take the challenge and send me the answers to my questions along with proof on my email ID. Why delay, send your documents and other information today itself to get appropriate response.”
I am 100% sure that he won’t accept mu challenge, but would again start posting rubbish messages, not only on this thread, but also on the aforesaid thread.

At an earlier occasion also, I posed a challenge on him to prove any of my opinion against the law of land, whereas I can prove 100s of his opinions against the provisions of law.

Guest (Expert) 23 May 2020
" Fake would always worry about his Image but the Real would Just Dont Care of it "
Guest (Expert) 23 May 2020
Dear AA Jose,
By now you could have noticed, to what extent that quack is shameless, stubborn, wicked and mentally sick fellow. Apparently, being mentally sick, he continues to repeat his similar type of grumbling statements every time instead of replying or clarifying the doubts about him.
P. Venu (Expert) 24 May 2020
It is high time that Mr.Dhingra and Mr. Raj Kumar put an end to this tirade against each other. It is doing no good to themselves or the LCI or other participants. On the other hand, the overreach on their part is impairing the credibility of this forum. It is humane to have difference opinion, and the stature of the experts ought to be that differences should not lead to personal rivalry.

Let us contribute to this public platform by judging the facts and law, and not by being judgmental of each other.
Guest (Expert) 24 May 2020
Learned Advocate Mr.P.Venu your advise is appreciated. Still you had not realized the fact that this fellow is an un qualified person and an fake and is just roaming here to exploit the querist and he had done this cheating job already. First he would approach the querist and collect all their case details and fees for it and he would negotiate with the other side of the querist and would extract money saying that he would help them in winning the case.That is his Modus Operandi . It is confirmed by Advocate friends at Saharanpur.. When the Time comes it would be Exposed. He is un qualified Not An Advocate and cheat and fraud. . KIND ATTN Mr.P.Venu if you are going to address my self along with that culprit from now on wards do not address me for any thing and you could negotiate with that culprit directly very well . Even my self would avoid all your Posts and Never would address until and unless my self is disturbed by you, If atleast few Querists were cautioned about this Fraud and Quack dhingra boy by this Thread that would suffice.
Guest (Expert) 24 May 2020
Dear Mr. P. Venu,
Can you please say, with reference to response by Mr. NJS to your post, what you could gather about the characteristics of that fellow? Even he has not spared you. He has not desisted from threatening you, when you have rendered your advice.

Had he been a legal expert, he could well have realised, what criminal offence he was going to commit by making such allegations without any proof in his hand. That itself proves that he is only a fake expert. His name also does not seem to be real. His picture also does not match with the website he maintains in the name of "Rajkumar.N" from which name the characters of “J & S” have also disappeared. Even from his website it reveals as if he handled only two cases during the whole duration of four & half years of registration/construction of the site. It might also be possible that he could have uploaded those two cases, as examples, just to impress the gullible public, as if he is a real expert on SEBI matters. BUT EVEN IN ALL OF THOSE TWO CASES, THE ACCUSED WERE PENALISED IN ADJUDICATION.

Even he does not seem to have been registered with SEBI, as neither “Rajkumar.N”, nor “N.J.S. Rajkumar”, nor his website was found to have been registered with SEBI.

ONLY RECENTLY, he has edited and pruned his profile page drastically, only during the last week, so that he could not be caught at wrong foot, as he claimed several qualities and skills in his previous profile, which could have been challenged quite easily. In his previous profile he stated that he was a practising lawyer of High Courts. But I can bet, he cannot quote even a single case, if won during his false registration with the Bar Council from the rolls of which he was understood to have been struck off due to not having any LLB Degree. Apparently that can be the reason that he has not replied even a single one of questions posed by me on him. The same were reproduce in one of my posts, above.

HOWEVER, I HAVE ALREADY POSED A CHALLENGE ON HIM TO PROVE ANY SUCH INSTANCE THE HE PRETENDED IN HIS POST ADDRESSED TO YOU, which apparently was made with the sole intention to assassinate my character in the public, a very serious offence on his part in this open forum.

You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .

Click here to login now