Sanjay Shivajirao Powar And Ors vs Shefali Kartik Mehta
2023 Latest Caselaw 10740 Bom

                                                                                    26-cra594-2023.doc


                      VRJ
                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                   CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.594 OF 2023



        Digitally
                      Sanjay Shivajirao Powar & Ors.                ... Applicants
        signed by
        VAIBHAV
VAIBHAV RAMESH
RAMESH JADHAV
                                  V/s.
JADHAV Date:
        2023.10.18
        10:33:22
        +0530         Shefali Kartik Mehta                          ... Respondent


                      Mr. Shrikrishna Ganabawale with Mr. Kush M.
                      Lahankar for the applicants.
                      Mr. Anand S. Patil for the respondent.



                                                    CORAM    : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                                    DATED    : OCTOBER 17, 2023
                      P.C.:

1. Arguable questions are raised. Hence, Rule.

2. It is undisputed fact that reliefs claimed in the suit have already been granted by the Consumer Court. According to the plaintiff, the reliefs granted by the Consumer Court are not being complied with by the defendants. In that case appropriate remedy under section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is available with the plaintiff. However, once the competent Court having jurisdiction grants relief claimed in the suit, filing of suit and continuation of it would amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, in my opinion, the facts of the case are prima facie covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Machado Brothers & Ors. reported in

26-cra594-2023.doc

(2004) 11 SCC 168.

3. The judgment relied upon by the applicants in the case of Srihari Hanumandas Totala vs. Hemant Vithal Kamat and Others reported in (2021) 9 SCC 99 is concerned, there cannot be dispute about preposition of law that at the time of consideration of application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Court is required to consider only averments in the plaint or documents annexed along with plaint. However, in the facts of the case in view of undisputed fact that the reliefs claimed have already been granted by the Consumer Court, the applicants have made out a case for grant of interim relief.

4. There shall be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c).

5. It will be open for the plaintiff to proceed with remedies under section 27 or 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)