The consumer protection act has come into force from 24th July 2020. Now I have filed a case in district forum under the old act of 1984 with a total claim of Rs 20 lakhs in the year 2019. The pecuniary jurisdiction of a district forum was only 20 lakhs under old act of 1984. Under the new act of 2019 the pecuniary jurisdiction is increased to Rs 1 crore. Now I have filed and amendment application in the forum and showed sufficient reason and prayed for enhanced compensation of Rs 40 lakhs stating pecuniary jurisdiction of forum has increased. I have also given estimates of new damages done by opposite parties and justification as to why the compensation needs to be enhanced. Now my specific question is has district forum has authority to accept the amendment of prayer and enhance compensation beyond 20 lakhs for cases which were filed under the old act of 1984 ? It will be of immense help if suitable Supreme Court or NCDRC judgements are given
but sir everything has to be done on the basis of any established law of any established judgement by the honorable supreme court. Nothing in the new act says that applications which has been filed in the old act the new act does not apply. what law what legal principle is there from the code of civil procedure for the consumer protection act will be applicable in this case? The case is regarding medical negligence. Section 107 of the new act states that the old consumer protection act is repealed. so at this point the forum has jurisdiction upto 1 crore there is no difficulty in enhancing the compensation beyond 20 lacs.
As I understand, state commissions are contemplating to send those appeals admitted but trial not commenced in SC back to jurisdictional forums. Before commencement of trail, complaint can be taken back through petition and can be filed with amended prayers afresh. (I am not aware as to refund of such fees earlier paid, as forums/commissions are not refunding such amount to complaints, if the complaint is not accepted or taken back by complaints.)
Firstly thanks a lot for everybody for responding. Let me tell you that this is a case of medical negligence. while in the first draftt of the new act in 2018 health care has been mentioned as one of the deficiency of service. Later on after pressure from healthcare professionals the word health care has been omitted from the definition of deficiency of service. now the honorable supreme court as per the old consumer protection act of 1986 has already included health care under the purview of consumer act 1986. While in the new act health care has not been included and supreme court has not decided on the matter hence the matter is res Integra. Any judgement of supreme court or definition by supreme court from the old act cannot be automatically carried to the new act and the matter has to be again evaluated by the honorable supreme court as per the new act. if I re-file the case under the new act of 2019 the opposite party may bring in preliminary objections that health care has not been included in the new consumer protection act of 2019. Hence the honorable district forum may reject the case.
I have another suggestion.I shall pray before the honorable district forum for the amendment of my prayer from 20 lacs to 40 lacs and shall ask the honorable district forum that if the prayer is rejected the rejection may be accompanied by reasoned speaking order why it is rejected and on basis of which law. in that case that particular part of rejection for enhancing the prayer may be challenged in the state commission and the state commission will decide that whether if a case is filed within the purview of old act the prayer to enhance the compensation from 20 lacs to 40 lacs can be allowed since the pecuniary jurisdiction of the district forum has increased. Please comment whether this will be proper or not.
Sir can you cite any suitable court judgement for any basis of law with which you are stating this ?
Amendment of law is not the ground for seeking relief but amendment of law is a way out of seeking relief.