Full Judgment Text
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2008 OF 2009
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.3946 of 2008)
M/s. Haabia Advertising India Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant(s)
Versus
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. ...Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The appellant is an Advertising Company. It is engaged in the business of
putting up advertisements through hoardings and sky-signs at Visakhapatnam. In
1994, the appellant filed complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act,
1986 (for short, “the Act”) for award of compensation to the tune of Rs. 20 lakhs by
stating that the hoardings which were insured were illegally removed by the
authorities. By an order dated 8.8.2001, the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, ‘the State Commission’) held that there
was no deficiency of service and dismissed the complaint. The National Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, “the National Commission”) confirmed
the order of the State Commission by observing that after having availed the remedy
by filing writ petition and contempt petition before the High Court, the petitioner
(appellant herein) is not entitled to relief under the Act.
....2/-
- 2 -
In our view, the reason assigned by the National Commissions for refusing
to entertain the claim of the appellant is legally untenable and the impugned order is
liable to be set aside because the writ petition and contempt petition filed by the
appellant against the Municipal Corporation in the matter of alleged illegal removal
of hoardings etc. do not have direct bearing on its claim for award of compensation.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, impugned orders are set aside and the
matter is remanded to the National Commission for disposal of the appeal filed by the
appellant on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties.
......................J.
[B.N. AGRAWAL]
......................J.
[G.S. SINGHVI]
New Delhi,
March 30, 2009.