M/S Nandhini Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sri Ankur Srivastava

M/S. NANDHINI HOTELS PVT. LTD., A COMPANYINCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 114/2, LALBAGH FORT ROAD MINERVA CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED DIRECTOR SRI. RUPESH ANAND

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. RICAB CHAND K, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI ANKUR SRIVASTAVA

¶14

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

S/O HARIKRISHNA SRIVASTAVA RESIDING AT NO. 35, LATHALAYA 6TH CROSS, MGR LAYOUT MAHADEVAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 048.

¶16

ICICI BANK LIMITED NO. 224, 3RD CROSS NEELADRI NAGAR, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE 1 BANGALORE - 560 100 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.09.2025 PASSED BY THE 1ST

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:49462 WP No. 33701 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

ADDL. BANGALORE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SHANTI NAGAR BANGALORE RURAL - 560 025 IN COMPLAINT NO. 03/2024 RECEIVED (ANNX-A) AND ETC.,

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶27

a. Issue a Writ or order or direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by quashing the impugned order dated 18^th September,2025 passed by the 1^st Additional Bangalore Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Shantinagar, Bangalore Rural-560 025 in complaint No.03/2024 received; (Annexure A)

¶28

b. Issue such other Writ or Order or Direction that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶29

What is challenged is the final order dated 18.09.2025

¶30

passed by the I Addl. Bangalore Consumer Disputes

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:49462 WP No. 33701 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Redressal Commission, Shanthingar, Bangalore under consumer complaint No.03/2024.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to assail the same on two grounds. Firstly on the ground that the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 (a) and (d) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before the said Consumer Forum was not considered prior to final order being passed.

¶35

Secondly, by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ibrat Faizan vs. Omaxe Buildhome Private Limited¹ , his submission is that, though statutory appeal is available to the State Commission, this Court could exercise under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶36

I am unable to agree with the aforesaid grounds. Insofar as his first submission is concerned, the provision of Code of Civil Procedure is not applicable to the consumer proceedings and it cannot be a

¶37

1 reported in (2023) 11 SCC 594

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:49462 WP No. 33701 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

ground for the petitioner to contend in his application under Order VII Rule 11, that the said application is required to be considered prior to the final order to be passed by the District Commission.

¶41

Utmost his contention in the said application would have to be considered at the time of passing of final order. Now that the final order is passed by the said Consumer Forum, the petitioner has alternative efficacious remedy to file an appeal before the State Commission under the Consumer Protection Act.

¶42

Reserving such liberty to the petitioner to urge all the grounds in the said appeal which are urged in this petition as and when it is filed, the writ petition stands dismissed .

¶43