Live
- Deepam-2 Scheme Reaches 5 Million Beneficiaries in Three Weeks, says Nadendla Manohar
- Will RG Kar tragedy impact Bengal bypoll results?
- BGT 2024:25: Josh Hazlewood picks four as Australia bundle out India for 150
- BRS rallies support for Lagacharla ‘victims’
- COP29: Scientists, artists, faith leaders call for greater commitment to delivery of climate finance
- Woman donates liver to husband, saves life
- Mechanic Rocky Review: Thrilling Action Film with Twists and Great Performances
- Ponguleti Sudhakar Reddy rubbishes Rahul Gandhi's claims on Modi and Adani
- ‘We can’t take things for granted’: Jayasuriya on balancing formats and Sri Lanka’s path to WTC final
- Prakash Ambedkar ready to 'power' the winner in Maha polls - Mahayuti or MVA
SC issues notice for contempt proceedings to two NCDRC members
Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice for initiation of contempt proceedings to two members of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) who had issued non-bailable warrants against the directors of a real estate company despite a restraint order passed by the apex court.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice for initiation of contempt proceedings to two members of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) who had issued non-bailable warrants against the directors of a real estate company despite a restraint order passed by the apex court.
Issuing notice, a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah remarked that the duo flouted the apex court’s order and it is not satisfied with their explanation.
NCDRC's Presiding Member Subhash Chandra and Member Dr Sadhna Shanker proceeded to issue non-bailable warrants against the directors of M/s Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. despite the fact that SC in an earlier order had directed that no coercive steps would be taken against the latter in the execution proceedings.
Subsequently, the NCDRC members filed an apology affidavit before the apex court stating that the error committed by them was inadvertent and unintended. However, the Supreme Court found it "implausible to accept the explanation" that the apex court’s order was not brought to the notice of the NCDRC.
It said that even after recording that the SC order had been brought to its notice, the NCDRC proceeded to direct the appellant company to file an affidavit of compliance with regard to the execution of the decree.
The issue will be heard next on May 15.
