No one appears for the complainant. Notice sent to the complainant has been received back with the remarks eft No other address of the complainant is available in the Commission. 2. Even then, we have carefully perused the averments and allegations made in the complaint. On doing so, we are of the view that the present complaint is beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission. We say so because the complainant himself has claimed compensation of Rs.46,54,000/- towards alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party Bank. However, for the purpose of determination of pecuniary jurisdiction, he had added a sum of Rs.79,00,000/-, the amount of sanctioned loan, which in our view, is not legally permissible. In terms of the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, it is the amount of claim which would be relevant both for the purpose of valuation of pecuniary jurisdiction and relief claimed. The complainant cannot value the complaint on a different value other than the value of his claim. Therefore, the claim in the complaint being less than Rupees one crore, the complaint is not maintainable before this Commission and as such is dismissed, however, with the liberty to the complainant to work out his remedy before appropriate court / forum in accordance with law.