"High Court Jurisdiction Over NCDRC Orders: Scope, Limitations, and Legal Precedents"

 Apex Court Decision on Jurisdiction of High Court  against the appellate/revisional  order of the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission: critical analysis 

In M/S Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd versus Suresh Chander Jain and anr Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 5263 of 2023, (2023 INSC 649) decided on July 26, 2023, the Supreme Court categorically held that   the order of the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in its appellate and revisional jurisdiction are liable to be challenged before the Jurisdictional  High Court under Article 226/ 227 of the Constitution of India. the appeal to the Supreme Court would lie only against the original jurisdiction.  the court expresses view as under:

     "38. in the aforesaid view of the matter, we have reached to the conclusion that we should not adjudicate this petition on merits. we must ask the petition herein to first go before the jurisdictional High Court either by way of a writ application under 
Article 226 of the Constitution or by invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the jurisdictional High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. of course, after the High Court adjudicates and passes a final order, it is always open for either of the parties to thereafter come before this court by filing special leave petition, seeking leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution."

  the court relied upon the recent pronouncement of the Supreme Court in Ibrat Faizan v. Omaxe Builhome Private Limited  reported in 2022 INSC 573 

 the court held in the Ibrat Faizan as under:

           "11. therefore,, an appeal against the order passed by the National Commission to             this Court would be maintainable only in case the order is passed by the National             Commission in exercise of its powers conferred under section 58(1)(a)(i) or under             section 58(1)(a)(ii) of 2019 Act. no further appeal to this court is provided against the     order passed by the Natinal Commission in exercise of its powers conferred under section         58(1)(a) (iii) or under section 58(1)(a)(iv) of the 2019 Act. in that view of the mater, the     remedy which may be available to aggrieved party against the order passed by the National     Commission in an appeal under section 58(1)(a)(iii) or section 58(1)(a)(iv) would be to     approach the concerned High Court having jurisdiction under Article 227 of the     Constitution of India"

    14. while exercising the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the High         Court has to exercise the jurisdiction under Article 227  within the parameters  within         which such jurisdiction is required to be exercised"

After a close scrutiny to the recent pronouncements of the Supreme Court in the matter, it is safely concluded that the decisions are  definitely a great help for the redressal of the Consumer grievances, since it was very difficult to approach the Supreme Court after passing order of the NCDRC.