[Consumer Protection Act] Pre-deposit of 50% for appealing against NCDRC order won't apply to complaints prior to 2019 Act: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court today held that condition of payment of 50% of the amount awarded in case an appeal is being preferred against a National Consumer Redressal Commission (NCDRC) order before the top court will not be applicable to the complaints filed prior to the commencement of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.(ECGC Ltd vs Mokul Shriram EPC JV).A Bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian was dealing with an appeal against an order passed by the NCDRC whereby the appellant was directed to pay a sum of ₹265.01 crores along with interest @ 10 percent from September 19, 2016, within a period of three months.."In view of the binding precedents of the Constitution Bench judgments referred to above, we hold that onerous condition of payment of 50 percent of the amount awarded will not be applicable to the complaints filed prior to the commencement of the 2019 Act," the Court held..By way of background, the complainant was awarded a contract for construction of rain water drainage, heavy sewerage and municipal road system by the Government of Basra, Iraq..The complainant obtained two specific contracts (Letter of Credit Comprehensive Risks Policies) by paying a sum of ₹10,38,03,912 as premium to the appellant.The grievance of the complainant was that the payment for invoices issued for the work done under the contract was suspended. Later, the contract also was withdrawn by the Government of Basra owing to some internal conflict.The appellant herein rejected the insurance claim of the complainant and thus relief was sought before the NCDRC by filing a complaint under Section 21(a)(i) of the 1986 Act. The complaint was allowed on January 27, 2021 leading to appeal before the Supreme Court.In the appeal, the appellant filed an application to entertain the appeal as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.The said application came to be decided by the present judgment..Attorney General KK Venugopal for the appellant argued that the contact here was governed under the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 under which the condition was that no appeal shall be entertained by the Supreme Court unless the person who is required to pay the amount deposits fifty per cent of the amount or ₹50,000, whichever is less.The appellant, therefore, insisted that the appeal be heard on payment of ₹50,000..However the respondents stated the case fell under the 2019 Act under which in terms of Section 67, no appeal against the order of NCDRC shall be entertained by the Supreme Court unless the person has deposited fifty per cent of the amount required to be paid.Senior Counsel Nidhesh Gupta appearing for the respondent contended that consumer protection legislation is a beneficial legislation and, therefore, the interpretation which benefits the consumer should be preferred. In this regard, he relied on the judgment in Neena Aneja & Anr. v. Jai Prakash Associates Ltd.The top court, however, noted that in Neena Aneja, it was held that there was no express intention in the repealing enactment that all pending cases would stand transferred to the fora created under 2019 Act..The Court in light of various judgments, ruled in favour of the appellant and allowed the application..The appellants were represented by Advocate Saket Satapathy and Naval Sharma, partners with Tuli & Co. .[Read Judgment]