Manipur High Court
Ace Alliance Private Ltd vs State Of Manipur (Caf & Pd) on 29 January, 2025
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Item No. 3-6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 41 of 2025 with
MC(WP(C) No. 35 of 2025 with
CRP(CRP Art. 227) No. 37 of 2024 with
MC(CRP(CRP Art. 227) No. 64 of 2024
Ace Alliance Private Ltd.
.....Petitioner/s
- Versus -
State of Manipur (CAF & PD), Manipur & 5 Ors.
.... Respondent/s
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
Order
29.01.2025
[1] Heard Mr. P. Tomcha, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Mr. Y. Ashang, learned G.A. assisted by Mr. Phungyo Zingkhei,
learned Dy. G.A. for the State respondent and Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned
senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Rommel, learned counsel for the
private respondent/complainant before the district forum.
[2] In CRP(CRP Art. 227) No. 37 of 2024: The petitioner is
challenging the order dated 31.07.2024 passed by the Ld. District
Consumer Forum Commission, Imphal in Consumer Complaint Case
No. 4 of 2024 mainly on the ground that on the day, the matter was
heard by the Commission, the term of the members of the Commission
has already expired and hence, the impugned was passed without any
jurisdiction.
[3] In WP(C) No. 41 of 2025: The petitioner is challenging
the extension orders of the terms of the members of the District
Consumer Forum Commission, Imphal on the ground that the statute
does not provide any power of extension.
[4] In CRP(CRP Art. 227) No. 37 of 2024: Mr. N. Ibotombi,
learned senior counsel for the private respondent/complainant, draws
the attention of this Court to the provisions of Section 41 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which stipulates that against any order
passed by a District Consumer Commission, an appeal shall lie before
the State Consumer Commission and hence, the present petition filed
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Court is not
maintainable in the present form.
[5] In WP(C) No. 41 of 2025: Mr. Y. Ashang, learned G.A.
for the State respondent, states that since the petitioner is not an
aggrieved party, a writ in the nature certiorari will not lie.
[6] At this stage, Mr. P. Tomcha, learned counsel for the
petitioner, on instruction, submits that he may be permitted to withdraw
the present petitions i.e. CRP(CRP Art. 227) No. 37 of 2024 and WP(C)
No. 41 of 2025 with liberty to approach appropriate forum for his
grievance as per rule.
[7] Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection in
withdrawing the present petitions without expressing any opinion by
this Court.
[8] Recording the submissions made at the bar, the present
petitions are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach
appropriate forum as per rule, if so advised.
[9] It is made clear that this Court does not express any
opinion on the merit of the case.
[10] With this observation, the petitions are disposed of.
[11] Furnish a copy of this order to the learned counsel
appearing for the parties.
JUDGE
Kh. Joshua Maring
Digitally signed by
KH. KH. JOSHUA
JOSHUA MARING
Date: 2025.01.31
MARING 09:41:13 +05'30'
[ad_1]
Source link