NCDRC revision petition, grounds for revision petition before NCDRC, Section 58(1)(b), NCDRC lawyer, consumer revision petition, NCDRC limitation, State Commission order, NCDRC jurisdiction
One situation where this can happen is when the State Consumer Commission passes an order which it possibly should not have had jurisdiction to pass, has overlooked a jurisdictional flaw or has proceeded despite a serious procedural anomaly.
At this stage, it is but natural for the consumer (or trader) to ask: Can we file a revision petition before the NCDRC?
Whether a revision petition is filed before the National Commission depends on the order passed and the nature of error committed. First and foremost, filing a revision petition before the National Commission is not a chance to plead your consumer dispute from scratch and hope for a different outcome.
As stated above, the NCDRC has been conferred revisional jurisdiction only in those cases where the State Commission:
âhas exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it by law, or has acted illegally or with material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdiction.â Section 58(1)(b), Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
What this translates to is that if you are a consumer from Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, Gurugram, Lucknow, Mumbai, Bengaluru or any other city in India, the remedy of filing a revision petition is available only in narrowly defined situations. BK Singh Advocate has resolved scores of consumer litigation queries from readers and clients across India who were unsure about whether to file an appeal, revision, review or some other remedy.
Secondly, since a revision petition seeks to assail the jurisdiction of the deciding forum (here, the State Commission), care has to be exercised in actually drafting the petition. Rather than narrating the facts of the complaint, care must be taken to point out the jurisdictional error in the order.
BK Singh Advocate will meticulously analyse the State Commissionâs order, the records uploaded on the District Commissionâ portal, pleadings and evidence (if any) to advise you if your intended challenge is rightly brought before the revisional jurisdiction of the NCDRC.
Difference between Appeal and Revision is crucial for consumers as well as service providers registered in India. An appeal is a wider process of statuary remedy against an order. Revision has a very limited jurisdiction to be entertained.
State Commission.
Under Section 58(1)(b), National Commission may call for the record of any consumer dispute pending with or received by State Commission in case following grounds of revision are satisfied. In simpler terms, NCDRC gives these grounds in their own Direction For Filing Of Revision Petitions.
What this means is that you cannot file a revision merely because you are unhappy with the rationale State Commission used in arriving at a verdict. A revision petition has to precisely identify the jurisdictional error/material irregularity that satisfies Section 58(1)(b) to call for record.
It becomes crucial to understand this for consumer disputes filed within Delhi NCR against builders,insurance companies, banks, hospitals, schools, colleges,developers, MMR property dealers or any service provider. At NCDRC, we guide our customers about the rightful statuary remedy avilable with them before investing time and money on a frivolous filing.
As mentioned by BK Singh Advocate, Maintainability of Revision should be checked before preparing the petition. Initiating the wrong remedy will cause unnecessary delay.
Revision petitions are typically based on one or more of the following three concepts.
A revision can be filed on the ground that the State Commission has exercised a jurisdiction that it is not legally allowed to exercise.
The allegation must have legal significance. A party cannot simply characterize an adverse finding as âmore than its jurisdictionâ. The petition must state what jurisdiction was exercised, why the Commission did not have that jurisdiction and why the order being challenged is affected by that exercise.
Our lawyers at NCDRC will comb through the order and the proceedings below to determine whether the complaint, application or dispute was decided outside the Commissionâs statutory powers.
If the State Commission was required to exercise a particular jurisdiction by law but failed to do so then Section 58(1)(b) allows for revision. The specific jurisdiction must be determined based on the pleadings, applications filed, orders passed and statutory provisions relevant to the issue.
Simply put, a strong revision petition will usually link an alleged error by the Commission to a jurisdiction that it was legally bound to consider.
Similarly, Section 58(1)(b) states thatrevision is permissible if the State Commission has exercised its jurisdiction â
This revisional ground needs to be framed very judiciously. You cannot take exception to some finding of fact and try to turn the order into a ground fit for revision. You must plead what illegal or materially procedural step was taken by the Commission and why such step is of legal significance.
As a consumer/business owner already battling a litigation, it can be difficult for you to determine that just by reading the order. Schedule a free consultation with BK Singh Advocate and let us help you segregate an appealable variance from a revisional ground.
The difference above is critical while deciding which remedy would apply.
| Issue | Appeal | Revision |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Furnished by Statute as challenge to an order | of supervisory jurisdiction exercised by the Court |
| Focus | Grounds allowed under the relevant appeal clause | Error of jurisdiction or material irregularity |
| Character | Broader and statutory remedy available within its scope | Narrower revisional remedy exercised |
| Available | Specific to the order and the statutory provision | Specific to the conditions allowed under Section 58(1)(b) |
| Question | Is the order appealable under the provision prescribed. | Is revisional jurisdiction attracted in the case |
Each category is however only indicative. The nature of remedy would depend on the order passed, stage of proceedings and the statutory pathway taken.
While exercising their discretion, NCDRC Lawyers must be consulted before filing where a State Commission order falls under appellate, original or revisional jurisdiction.
Legal consultation is useful if the order passed by State Commission involves a jurisdictional issue, wrong remedy would otherwise get filed or limitation period is expiring.
It can also be helpful where the matter involves significant financial stakes, builder/property issue, insurance repudiation, medical negligence, banking services, education services or any other complex consumer problem.
For clients located in Delhi, New Delhi, Noida, Greater Noida, Ghaziabad and Gurugram area NCDRC Lawyers can help analyze the State Commission order and advice if the proposed challenge seems to fall under the provisions of statutory revisional jurisdiction.
Clients should first aim to understand the issue. Legal filing should only take place after the remedy/scope and grounds have been understood.
BK Singh Advocate provides legal services to help you understand whether the consumer dispute requires a revision to be filed before NCDRC. Normally, we would only examine the order of the impugned State Commission, the pleadings advanced at the previous stages, evidence on record (if any) and legal points for invocation of revisional jurisdiction.
Services shall also include examination of maintainability, exploring potential jurisdictional angles, conducting a limitation review, drafting of petition and supporting documents, and representing you before the concerned consumer forum.
If the order impugned is passed by the State Commission of Delhi NCR or any other State Commission of India, then Lawyers at NCDRC can guide you on whether the proposed proceeding would amount to filing a revision/appellate/review or some other form of legal remedy.
Yes. Section 58 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 empowers NCDRC to call for the record of any proceeding before the State Commission and decide on them.
The primary ground under Section 58(1)(b) is that âthe State Commission in exercise of its jurisdiction â (i) acted without jurisdiction vested in it by law, or (ii) failed to exercise jurisdiction so vested, or (iii) acted illegally or with material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdictionâ.
No. Revision is a narrower supervisory remedy in contrast to an appeal. Appeal and revision have different statutory bases and should not be treated as alternative remedies.
Not really. Getting an order against you is not a ground in itself for revision. The prayer and proposed petition must satisfy Section 58(1)(b).
According to the filing instructions published on the NCDRC website, the period granted is of 90 days from the date of receiving the free certified copy of the order from the State Commission. Any delay would have to be supported by a separate application for condonation of delay.
No. The maintainability of a revision depends on the nature of the order and the specific type of jurisdiction exercised by the State Commission. NCDRC Lawyers will help determine if a revision is maintainable on a particular State Commission order.
Second revision petitions are not automatically maintainable. The Delhi High Court in Garv Buildtech allowed the NCDRC decision rejecting a second revision petition filed against an order passed by State Commission exercising its revisional jurisdiction.
Typically, the documents required are the revision petition, supporting affidavit, order of the State Commission, order of the District Commission (if available), pleadings before the two Commissions and copies of documents/reports relied upon. Additional applications such as an application for stay of operation of order or application for condonation of delay would need to be filed where applicable.
Stay can be requested by filing an application along with the revision petition if the facts of the case and the law allow for such relief. Grant of stay is discretionary and is not a given in every case.
A revision petition submitted past the 90-day window would need a separate application asking the NCDRC to condone the delay. Depending on the facts that led to the delay and the corresponding law governing limitation, your petition could be dismissed as limitation would have to be attracted from the date of receiving the copy of order from State Commission.
Only ONE question must be asked to oneself before filing a revision petition at NCDRC - what is the specific jurisdictional / material legal flaw in the order passed by State Commission?
Section 58(1)(b) envisages a restricted revisional jurisdiction. It neither permits reopening of every factual determination nor it is a mechanism to file a second chance appeal in ordinary course. Even the recent judgments of NCDRC and Delhi High Court have laid emphasis on quoting the specific jurisdiction exercised by State Commission before seeking any relief.
Only consumers from Delhi NCR / India need not get fooled by any experienced counsel and get the order reviewed at the initial stage itself. Advocate at NCDRC can review the order and the relevant case record and limitation and advice you the legal course open for you.
BK Singh Advocate assists those who want to get their consumer complaints and NCDRC orders reviewed by experienced Lawyers. And the review process begins with reading the order and the law. No lawyer here will start drafting and filing a revision petition at NCDRC because you were not granted the relief you expected.
Speak directly with Advocate BK Singh at LEGAL365.
Book Appointment Call NowFree first consultation. Honest legal advice.
