NCDRC stays order in consumer dispute over forensic test of Salman Khan’s signature
Taking note of the petitioner's allegation on the conduct of the complainant in the case, the national consumer body has raised questions regarding the jurisdiction of the district consumer forum.
NCDRC was dealing with plea regarding investigation of Salman Khan's signature in consumer case. (File Photo) The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has stayed further proceedings before the district consumer commission regarding the investigation of the genuineness of Salman Khan’s signature involving a consumer complaint against Kamla Kant and Company LLP.
A bench of Justice A P Sahi (president) and member Bharatkumar Pandya was dealing with a plea of Kamla Kant and Company LLP challenging the district consumer body order that directed the state forensic science laboratory to investigate respondent Salman Khan’s signatures and directed him to personally appear at the stage of evidence and submit an affidavit affirming his signatures.
“In view of what has been urged and noticed by us here, as also the orders passed by the High Court of Rajasthan, it would be appropriate to issue notice to the respondent/complainant calling upon him to answer this appeal,” the court said on June 10.
The bench listed the matter for June 22 for the next hearing.
Order of investigation of Salman Khan’s signature
The case originated from a consumer complaint filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC), Kota, by Inder Mohan ‘Honey’ alleging misleading advertisement.
Kamla Kant and Company LLP filed an appeal before the NCDRC challenging the final judgment and order dated March 30, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) in a revision petition filed by the appellant against the order dated December 26, 2025 passed by the DCDRC directing the State FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) to investigate Salman Khan’s signatures and directing him to personally appear at the stage of evidence and submit an affidavit affirming his signatures.
It submitted that the SCDRC failed to exercise its jurisdiction correctly by ignoring provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Arguments of parties
Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that this perversity and inconsistency clearly indicate that the said unlawful process is being adopted by recording such orders only with a view to maintaining a complaint which was otherwise not maintainable.
It was argued that the same district commission has entertained the complaint giving rise to the present controversy and has been filed by the very same complainant.
They submitted that, as a matter of fact, the complainant Indra Mohan Singh “Honey” and his colleague Mr. Yogendra Singh Badiyal are involved in similar matters, thereby converting the consumer courts into an instrument of harassment, and as such, this matter also requires interference.
It was further argued that, as a matter of fact, the complainant Indra Mohan Singh “Honey” and his colleague Yogendra Singh Badiyal are involved in similar matters, thereby converting the consumer courts into an instrument of harassment, and as such, this matter also requires interference.
DSK Legal team, advocates Parag Khandhar, Partner, Chandrima Mitra, Partner, Tapan Radkar, and Zara Dhanbhoora, were representing Salman Khan.
Share
