Orissa

StateCommission

CC/53/2020

M/S Kalinga Polypacks Pvt Ltd - Complainant(s)

Versus

BM, New India Assurance Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

M/S B.K.Shrama & Assoc.

27 Jan 2023

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
ODISHA, CUTTACK
 
Complaint Case No. CC/53/2020
( Date of Filing : 07 Dec 2020 )
 
1. M/S Kalinga Polypacks Pvt Ltd
Gopalpur Chasapada, choudwar
CUTTACK
Orissa
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. BM, New India Assurance Co Ltd
Choudwar Branch, Kapileswar,choudwar
CUTTACK
Orissa
2. Senior Branch Manager,Corporation Bank
Bajarkbati Road
CUTTACK
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. D.P. Choudhury PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. Sudhiralaxmi Pattnaik MEMBER
 
PRESENT:M/S B.K.Shrama & Assoc., Advocate for the Complainant 1
 M/s. G.P. Dutta & Assoc., Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
 M/s. A. Mishra & Assoc., Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 27 Jan 2023
Final Order / Judgement

 

                        Learned counsel for both the parties are present.

2.                      Learned counsel for the OP submitted that the  complaint petition  clearly shows that complainant  has already paid premium of  only Rs.39,506/- and as such  the jurisdiction of this Commission is not  covered. Therefore, he submitted that the complaint case before this Commission is not maintainable.

 3.                    Learned counsel for the complainant  raised  objection by drawing our attention to  para-7 of their objection where they have alleged that this is maintainable before this Commission. According to him the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court on this issue is pending.

 4.                Considered the submission of both the parties, perused the record. Section-47(1)(a) is very clear in the following manner:-

              (a) to entertain –

              (i)  Complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration, exceeds rupees one crore, but does not exceed rupees ten crore,”

5.              The aforesaid provisions is clear to show that the complaint can be entertained  for value of goods or  the services paid as consideration, for which the question of amount paid is relevant to decide the pecuniary jurisdiction  of this Commission. Such view has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India  in C.C. No.833 of 2020 M/s. Pyaridevi Chabiraj Steels Pvt.Ltd. - Vrs- National Insurance Company Ltd.& three others.


  6.                     Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the complainant submitted that  the decision relied on by the Hon’ble National Commission has already been pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court for consideration. It appears that the issue has  not been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, for which we are bound by the statute as quoted above.

   7.                    In the  facts and circumstances, the present C.C. case filed   before this Commission is not  maintainable. Learned counsel for the complainant is at liberty to  withdraw the complaint and file it before the appropriate authority.

                       The complaint case is disposed of accordingly.

                        Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet  or webtsite of this  Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.  

                                               

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. D.P. Choudhury]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MS. Sudhiralaxmi Pattnaik]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.