ARIHANT SUPERSTRUCTURES LIMITED vs PUSHPA AGARWAL

Judgment text excerpt

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 19th March, 2025 + CM(M) 2477/2024 & CM APPL. 34267/2022 ARIHANT SUPERSTRUCTURES LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Arpit Gupta & Mr. Divya Pratap Parmar, Advocates. versus PUSHPA AGARWAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Dhruv Gupta, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging order dated 09.05.2022 passed in First Appeal No. 997/2021 by Hon‟ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short „NCDRC‟). 2. By virtue of the abovesaid order, the appeal filed by petitioner herein i.e. Arihant Superstructures Limited has been dismissed. 3. The above matter was filed before NCDRC impugning order dated 13.09.2021 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan in Consumer Complaint No.09/2017. 4. Since the entire cause of action pertaining to the present subject matter has arisen within the jurisdiction of Rajasthan High Court, in view of judgment dated 04.03.2024 passed by Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Siddhartha S Mookerjee vs. Madhab Chand Mitter, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 4205, the petitioner should rather approach the concerned jurisdictional High Court. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 2477/2024 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:20.03.2025 17:38:12 5. In Siddhartha S Mookerjee (supra), the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has, very categorically, observed that merely because NCDRC had allowed petition, the jurisdiction would not vest with Delhi High Court and observing that since the cause of action had arisen in Kolkata and the matter had been dealt with by the State Commission of West Bengal, it was held that the jurisdiction of High Court of Calcutta should ha