HABIB METROPOLITAN BANK PAKISTAN LIMITED vs PRESIDING OFFICER DISTRICT CONSUMER COURT SIALKOT S

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

HABIB METROPOLITAN BANK PAKISTAN LIMITED VS PRESIDING OFFICER DISTRICT CONSUMER COURT SIALKOT S.31(g)---Powers of Consumer Court to award lawyers' fee incurred in pre-remand proceedings before the superior courts---Scope---Granting of lawyer's fee by the Consumer Court incurred in pre-remand proceedings before the superior court would amount to exceeding its jurisdiction and mandate of S. 31(g) of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005---Facts in brevity were that respondent No.2 (consumer) filed a complaint before the Consumer Court against the appellant bank (service provider), alleging defective and sub-standard services regarding an ATM machine and a debit card issued by the bank---The Consumer Court initially returned the complaint for want of jurisdiction, however, the Supreme Court of Pakistan subsequently confirmed the Consumer Court's jurisdiction and directed it to decide the case---Upon remand, the Consumer Court partially accepted the complaint and awarded (i) Rs. 1,500 for the cost of the debit card; (ii) Rs. 50,000 as compensation for non-utilization of the ATM Card; (iii) Rs. 15,000 as litigation charges; (iv) Rs. 100,000 and Rs. 500,000 as lawyers' fees for proceedings before the High Court and the Supreme Court of Pakistan, respectively---The bank filed the present appeal choosing not to press the challenge to the amounts awarded under the first three heads and solely contested the award of lawyers' fees related to the proceedings before the High Court and the Supreme Court---Pivotal question for determination before the High Court was as to "whether the Consumer Court, under S. 31(g) of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005 (the "Act 2005"), had jurisdiction to award lawyers' fees incurred by a litigant in pre-remand proceedings before superior courts, in addition to costs related to proceedings before the Consumer Court itself"---Held: Awarding lawyers' fee by the Consumer Court to respondent No.2 (consumer) incurred by him to plead his case before the High Court as well as the Supreme Court of Pakistan amounted to exceeding its jurisdiction and stepping into the jurisdiction of superior courts as it was an admitted fact that the Supreme Court of Pakistan had not allowed civil petition filed by respondent No.2 with costs---Awarding fee of lawyers who pleaded the case of respondent No.2 before the High Court as well as the Supreme Court of Pakistan amounted to altering and modifying the judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan which was not covered under S. 31(g) of the Act, 2005---Consumer Court could exercise jurisdiction only to its own extent qua complaints filed before it---Consumer Court, being a subordinate court, could only determine the actual costs of litigation incurred by a litigant in relation to the proceedings pending before it and not the costs incurred during the proceedings before another court, such as the High Court or the Supreme Court of Pakistan---Impugned judgment was set aside to the extent of grant of lawyers' fee to respondent No.2 (consumer) incurred by him before the High Court as well as the Supreme Court of Pakistan---Appeal was partly allowed, in circumstances.

HABIB METROPOLITAN BANK PAKISTAN LIMITED vs PRESIDING OFFICER DISTRICT CONSUMER COURT SIALKOT S — 2025 CLD 1517 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLD