Existence of an arbitral remedy will not oust the jurisdiction of the consumer forum - If there is any inconsistency between two legislations, the later law, even if general in nature, would override an earlier special law.

Citation 

AIROnline 2022 SC 214

Headnotes

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(o) - Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 - Section 7B - Existence of an arbitral remedy under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, will not oust the jurisdiction of the consumer forum - . It would be open to a consumer to opt for the remedy of arbitration, but there is no compulsion in law to do so and it would be open to a consumer to seek recourse to the remedies which are provided under the Act of 1986, now replaced by the Act of 2019. (Para 16, 20)

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 - Section 2(42) - Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(o) - The insertion of the expression 'telecom services' in the definition which is contained in Section 2(42) of the Act of 2019 cannot, for the reasons which we have indicated be construed to mean that telecom services were excluded from the jurisdiction of the consumer forum under the Act of 1986 - Section 2(o) of the Act of 1986 wide enough to comprehend services of every description including telecom services. (Para 14, 20)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - The Act of 1986 is not a general law but a special law that has been enacted by Parliament specifically to protect the interest of consumers. [ Overruled General Manager, Telecom v. M Krishnan and Another (2009) 8 SCC 481 ] (Para 18)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(o) - Scope of expression 'service' discussed - a service of every description would fall within the ambit of the statutory provision. (Para 9)

Conflict of laws - If there is any inconsistency between two legislations, the later law, even if general in nature, would override an earlier special law. (Para 18)

Jurisdiction - An ouster of jurisdiction cannot be lightly assumed unless express words are used or such a consequence follows by necessary implication. (Para 16)

Case : Vodafone Idea Cellular Ltd. vs Ajay Kumar Agarwal |  CA 923 of 2017 | 16 Feb 2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 221
Coram: Justices DY Chandrachud, Surya Kant and Vikram Nath
Counsel: Adv Aditya Narain for appellant