Order No. 04     Dated :   28 .05.2019

            Today is fixed for Admission hearing.

            Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present.  The complainant filed the instant complaint against HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. & others on the allegation of deficiency in service in the dispute of nonpayment of repairing cost of the Audi Car.

            On perusal of the consumer complaint, it appears that the complainant obtained the Insurance Policy of the Audi Car from the OP-2  who are  carrying on business at P-255 B, CIT Road, Scheme – VIM, Kankurgachi, PS - Manicktala, Kolkata – 700 054 outside the  territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The Ld. Advocate for the complainant invited our attention to the amendment brought about in Section 11 (2) of the Act in the year,  2003. The amended section 11 (2) of the Act reads as under :

(2) A complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, -

(a) the Opposite party or each of the Opposite parties , where  there are more than one, at the time of the institution of  the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain ; or

(b) any of the Opposite parties where there are more than one at the time of institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office, or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the permission of the District Forum is given, or the Opposite parties who do not reside, or carry on business or has a branch office, or personally works for gain, as the case may be, acquiesce in such institution ; or

(c) the cause of action wholly or in part,  arises.

            Complainant filed an application on 09.04.2019 U/s 11 (2) (b) of the C.P. Act, 1986.

            In our opinion, that will not help the case of the complainant as the Insurance Policy was issued by OP-2 having its office at P-255 B, CIT Road, Scheme – VIM, Kankurgachi, PS - Manicktala, Kolkata – 700 054.

 If the contention of the Ld. Advocate for the complainant is accepted, it will mean that even if a cause of action has arisen in Manicktala then too complainant can file claim petition in Barasat or Alipore or anywhere in West Bengal where a Branch office of HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. is situated.  We cannot agree with this contention, it will lead to absurd consequences and lead to bench hunting.  In our opinion, the expression branch office in the amended section 11 (2) would mean the branch office where the cause of action has arisen.  No doubt this would be departing from the plain and literal words of section 11 (2) (b) of the Act.

            In the present case, since the cause action arose at Manicktala, the DCDRF, Unit-1 Kolkata alone will have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

:2:

For the reason stated herein above, we are not inclined to allow the prayer of the complainant U/s 11 2(b) of the C.P. Act., 1986. Thus, the MA No. 226 of 2019 is rejected and disposed of.

            The complaint is not admitted and dismissed.

Liberty be given to the complainant to approach their grievance before the competent Forum, if so desired.