MURTAZA TALPUR vs LEOPARDS COURIER SERVICES Ss — 2025 CLD 1141 ISLAMABAD

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

MURTAZA TALPUR VS LEOPARDS COURIER SERVICES Ss.8(1) & 9(3)---Punjab Consumer Protection Act (II of 2005), S.31---Extent of jurisdiction of Islamabad Consumer Court---Scope---Whether Consumer Court can award general/special damages---Consumer Court's jurisdiction to award broader damages examined---Consumer Court can entertain full spectrum of damage claims---Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005 permits broader remedies including legal costs---Phrase "any damage or loss"---Meaning and interpretation---Its interpretation includes emotional and financial harm---Senior citizen stranded abroad after flight cancellation---Rs. 500,000 claimed for distress and loss---The moot point which came up for determination before the High Court was as to "whether the Islamabad Consumer Court, under Section 9(3) of the Islamabad Consumer Protection Act, 1995, was legally empowered to award general and special damages, including compensation for mental agony, emotional distress, litigation expenses, and financial loss, arising from an unfair trade practice, or whether such remedies fell exclusively within the jurisdiction of civil courts?"---This moot point encapsulated the core legal controversy adjudicated in the case, i.e., the extent of the jurisdiction of the Islamabad Consumer Court and the interpretation of the phrase "any damage or loss" in light of legislative language, judicial precedents, and comparative statutory analysis (e.g., Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005)---The previously prevailing interpretation by the High Court was that under S. 9(3) of the Islamabad Consumer Protection Act, 1995, the Consumer Court could not award general or special damages, instead, only the actual damage or loss suffered could be compensated, and any broader claim for damages had to be pursued through a civil suit before a court of general jurisdiction---Due to this legal conflict, the matter was referred to the Division Bench for authoritative interpretation of the scope of S. 9(3) of the Islamabad Consumer Protection Act, 1995---Held: Requiring the consumer to seek special damages and general damages for the same cause of action from a different forum will only lead to multiplicity of proceedings---Since the plain language of S. 9(3) of the Islamabad Consumer Protection Act, 1995 authorized the learned Islamabad Consumer Court to award compensation for damage or loss without any restriction (except that it must be damage or loss suffered on account of any unfair trade practice) and the Islamabad Consumer Court may frame issues, record evidence, etc., there was no reason why only the consideration paid may be recovered under the Islamabad Consumer Protection Act, 1995 but not any other type of damage even if suffered on account of an unfair trade practice---The word 'any' used in S. 9(3) of the Islamabad Consumer Protection Act, 1995 before the words 'damage or loss' implied a wide scope of damages and loss and included all or every damage or loss suffered by the consumer on account of 'unfair trade practice' (as defined in the Islamabad Consumer Protection Act, 199)---In comparison to the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005, the general and special damages including mental distress and agony were recoverable thereunder where facts and circumstances entitled the consumer to damages over and above the consideration paid---The appeals were allowed and the impugned judgments were set aside by remanding the matter to the Consumer Court to record evidence in respect of the claim of the appellants with regard to general damages allegedly suffered by them on account of mental torture, shock, agony and financial loss and expenses, etc.---Cases remanded.

MURTAZA TALPUR vs LEOPARDS COURIER SERVICES Ss — 2025 CLD 1141 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLD