Orissa

Rayagada

CC/151/2016

B.Subba Raju - Complainant(s)

Versus

Apollo College of Physiotherapy - Opp.Party(s)

Self

25 Sep 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 151/ 2016.                                Date.   25.09   . 2019.

P R E S E N T .

 

Dr. Aswini  KumarMohapatra,                           President

Sri Gadadhara  Sahu,                                            Member.

Smt.PadmalayaMishra,.                                      Member

 

 

Sri B.Subba Raju,  S/O: Late B.Butchi Raju,  At: Cooperative colony, 2^nd. lane,        Po/Dist.Rayagada, State:  Odisha.765 001.                                                                                                                                           …….Complainant

Vrs.

The  Principal, Apollo College of Physiotherapy, Jubilee Hills, At/Po: Hyderabad, Dist: Ranga Reddy, Telangana,                         ..Opp.Party

Counsel for the parties:                         

For the complainant: - Self..

For the O.Ps  :- Sri Mahesh Patnaik, Advocate and associates.

 

                                                J u d g e m e n t.

        The  present disputes arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps for non refund of deposited amount a sum of Rs.2,41,500/- due to discontinuation of study  in the O.Ps institution

On being noticed the O.P. filed written version through their learned counsel and contended   that  the present complaint is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed against the O.P.. The O.P made preliminary  objection that  this forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.   The O.P    taking one and other pleas in the written version   sought to dismiss the complaint as it is not maintainable  under the C.P. Act, 1986. The facts which are not specifically admitted may be treated  as denial of the O.P.. The O.P `  prays to dismiss the complaint petition against them  for the best  interest   of justice.

The O.P   appeared and filed their written version.  Heard arguments from the    O.P.  and from the complainant.    Perused the record, documents, written version  filed by the parties. 

The  learned counsel for the O.P advanced arguments  & vehemently opposed the complaint touching the points both on the facts  as well as on  law.

                                        FINDINGS.

The O.P.  in their written version contended that the complaint petition filed by the complainant is not legally maintainable  and preliminary  objected  this forum has no territorial jurisdiction  to entertain  this case.

 

        Now  the issues to be decided by this forum are:-

        Whether this forum  has   territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint under the C.P. Act, 1986  ?

While answering  the issue  we would like to refer the citation.  It is held and reported  in CPJ-2010(1) page No. 136   where in the  Hon’ble  State commission, New Delhi  observed  “Forum should decide the dispute of jurisdiction  first, application kept open to be decided later”

 

Further It is held and reported  in CPR-2011(4) page No. 482   the  Hon’ble  National commission,  where in observed  “Conumer forum  can not adjudicate  disputes without  addressing to the basic issues”. 

Section 11(2)©  of the C.P. Act, 1986 has made  it specific that a complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum with in the local limits of whose jurisdiction  the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.  The present case in hand it is  revealed that  the  complainant had joined at Apollo College of Physiotherapy, Jubilee Hills, At/Po: Hyderabad, which is comes under the purview  of the territorial jurisdiction  of the Dist. Consumer Forum, at Hydrabad, State: Andhra Pradesh.  In view of this we observed  that this forum  has lack of  territorial  jurisdication to entertain the dispute.  

We  do not  think  proper to go  into merit of this case.

Hence, the claim of the   complainant can not be   entertained  before this forum. It is open to  complainant   ordinary remedy to approach proper forum.       

So  to meet the  ends of justice    the following order is passed.

ORDER.

            In the resultant  the complaint petition   stands  dismissed. The complainant  is free to approach the court of competent  having  its jurisdiction.   Parties are left to bear their own cost.  Accordingly the case  is closed.

              The time spent before consumer forum shall be set-off  by  the  authority, where the proceedings are taken up, as per provision of Section-14 of Limitation Act, as per the law laid   down by  the Hon’ble  Supreme Court in the case of Laxmi Engineering works Vrs. P.S.G.Industrial Institute 1995 (3) SCC  583.

 

Dictated and corrected by me

prononunced on this     25th        Day of   September,   2019.

 

            Member.                                 Member.                                             President