Consumer Complaints Cannot Be Dismissed For Non-Prosecution By The District Or State Commission: Kerela High Court

Before The Hon’ble High Court Of Kerela

Summary:

[1]The Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in its recent judgment clarified regarding consumer complaints, stating that such cases should not be dismissed simply because the Complainant fails to appear in court. The court emphasized that Consumer Commissions must decide cases based on their merits, even if one of the parties is absent. This decision came in response to a petition referred to single bench.

Facts:

• Suresh Nathan filed a consumer complaint with the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in 2019.
• The complaints faced repeated adjournments, and eventually, the Hon’ble Commission dismissed them because Nathan did not appear for the hearings.
• Nathan filed a review petition, but it was also rejected.
• Subsequently, he approached the Hon’ble Kerala High Court through a writ petition, challenging the dismissal of the complaints.

Issues:

1. Whether the Consumer Protection Act 2019 allow consumer complaints to be dismissed for non-prosecution (i.e., when the complainant is absent)?
2. Whether the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission required to decide complaints on their merits, even if the complainant is not present?

Held:

The Kerala High Court held that dismissing consumer complaints for non-prosecution is illegal. It further emphasized that the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, requires Consumer Commissions to hear and decide cases based on their merits. The Hon’ble Court clarified that the State Commission does not have the authority to dismiss a complaint simply because the complainant fails to appear.

Directions:

The Hon’ble Court set aside the State Commission’s orders dismissing Nathan’s complaints and the subsequent review petitions. The Hon’ble Court further restored both complaints to the Commission’s docket and directed that they be decided on their merits, regardless of whether Nathan attends future hearings.

The Hon’ble Court also instructed the parties to appear before the Consumer Commission on a specific date, i.e., March 19, 2025.

Analysis:

The judgment highlights the importance of prioritizing substantive justice over procedural technicalities in consumer protection cases. By ensuring that complaints are decided on their merits, the court has reinforced the rights of consumers and prevented them from being unfairly penalized for non-appearance.

[1] Suresh Nathan v. The State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission & Ors.

2025 SCC OnLine Ker 904

Judgment Dated: February 11, 2025