PER SHRI. S.M. RATNAKAR – HON’BLE PRESIDENT
1) The Complainant by this complaint has prayed that the Opposite Parties be directed to pay Rs.10 Lacs as loss of work because of illegal attachment plus Rs.9 lacs as compensation for mental and physical agony and prayed that the said amount be awarded with interest @ 24% p.a. from 14/08/2007 till its realization. The Complainant on 16/09/2014 filed pursis that the claim of the Complainant exceeds the jurisdiction of this Forum and therefore, this complaint may be allowed to be withdrawn and suitable directions may be issued.
2) The Opposite Parties strongly objected the said application/pursis and submitted that the complaint is pending before this Forum for last 7 years. The pleadings and written arguments of both the parties have been completed and only oral argument is to be heard. It is contended that the Complainant at this state seeking permission to withdrawal of this complain with liberty to file fresh. It is further contended that, if the liberty is granted by this Forum for filing fresh complaint it would cause great loss and damages to the Opposite Parties. It is submitted that the Complainant has every right to withdraw the complaint but cannot ask liberty to file fresh complaint. It is thus, submitted that the application/pursis filed by the Complainant with the prayer for withdrawal of complaint with liberty to file fresh may be rejected.
3) We heard oral argument of Advocate Smt. Rashmi Manne for the Complainant and Shri. Pradeep Gole, Ld.Advocate for the Opposite Parties.
4) The Ld.Advocate for the Opposite Parties though objected to allow to withdraw the present complaint with liberty to file fresh complaint, in our view upon going through the reliefs claimed by the Complainant as noted in para 1 of this order it is necessary to be taken into consideration whether the reliefs claimed by the Complainant can be decided by this Forum within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum or not ? In our view, if the interest would be calculated @ 24% p.a. on the amount of Rs.19 Lacs as claimed in the complaint from 14/08/2007 till the date of filing of the complaint also it comes about Rs.1,14,000/-. Thus, the total valuation of the complaint till filing of the complaint also exceeds the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum. Recently the Hon’ble State Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai, in the case of O.K. Marine V/s. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. in Consumer Complaint No.33/2006, decided on 08/7/2014 upon considering the decision of the Hon’ble National Commission in the case of M/s. Omex Ltd. V/s. Ms. Iqubal Begum & Ors. in First Appeal No.2013/887 decided on 16/05/2014 by calculating the total amount claimed by the Complainant held that the claim exceeds of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the State Commission of more than 1 Crore and therefore, the State Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and the complaint was maintainable only before the National Commission under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Hon’ble State Commission also in the aforesaid complaint (Cited Supra) held that the Hon’ble State Commission has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the compliant and further held that consequently other points do not survive for consideration. In the light of the above decision we also find that without going into other controversy raised by the parties to this complaint, the present complaint deserves to be returned to the Complainant for filing before the Hon’ble State Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai. As the Complainant has sought the withdrawal permission of this complaint with a request that to allow him the liberty to file fresh complaint before the Hon’ble State Commission at belated stage we find that the Complainant is required to compensate the Opposite Parties with cost. We hold that the Complainant needs to pay cost of Rs.1,500/- in total to the Opposite Parties. The Complainant has paid the said cost to the advocate for the Opposite Parties today only hence, the following order is passed –
O R D E R
- For want of pecuniary jurisdiction the Complaint No.278/2007 be returned to the Complainant for filing the same before the Hon’ble State Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai.
- The Complainant is granted time to present this complaint before the Hon’ble State Commission on or before 13/03/2015.
- The Complainant has already paid cost of Rs.1,500/- (Rs. One Thousand Five Hundred Only) in total to the Opposite Parties.
- Certified copies of this order be furnished to the parties.
