O R D E R
POONAM MALHOTRA, MEMBER
1. The brief facts of the present complaint are that based on the false assurances of the OP, the complainant purchased a Life Insurance Policy bearing No.19565411 on 23.08.2017 by making payment of Rs.50,000/- under the belief of one time premium . It is further alleged by the complainant that the OP had also assured to give LED TV besides the amount getting doubled in two years. However, on receipt of the Insurance Certificate and the Terms & Conditions of the Policy, the complainant got to know that the policy tenure was ten years with an annual premium of Rs.50,000/-. In reply to the Legal Notices dated 20.04.2018 and 07.05.2018 of the complainant for the cancellation and the refund of the policy amount, the OP refused to meet the prayers of the complainant. In view of the above, the complainant has prayed for directions to the OP for the cancellation of the said Insurance Policy and refund of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest @18% p.a., he has also prayed for Rs.20,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as cost of the litigation.
2. Heard the arguments and perused the record.
3. Perusal of the record shows that this Forum does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. On scrutiny of the record it is evident that the address of the OP as stated in the complaint is of Mayur Vihar, Delhi, which is not within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. Further, scrutiny of the documents filed by the complainant in support of his case shows the Branch Office of the OP is at Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi while its Corporate and Registered Office is in Mumbai. Even the address of the Insurance Agent is that of Noida (U.P.) as reflected in the letter of the OP dated 06.09.2017. Further, the Legal Notices sent by the complainant to the OP are also addressed to its Mayur Vihar Branch Office. From this, it is amply clear that OP is not based within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. Besides the above, it is not the case of the complainant that he had purchased the said Policy through On-line Mode from his residence or any place which falls within the jurisdiction of this Forum. In such circumstances, no cause of action is shown to have accrued within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.
4. To counter the objection of Territorial Jurisdiction raised by this Forum, the Ld. Counsel for the complainant has relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. in Delhi State & District Consumer Courts Practitioner Welfare Association (Regd.) V/s Lieutenant Governor & Ors in W.P. (C) 11424/2016 & CM No. 44784/2016 dated 01.02.2018 wherein it has been held as under :
“3. The writ petitioner has relied on other orders of the State Commission passed thereafter placing reliance the decision dated 31st October, 2007 holding that Delhi was one district for the purposes of the territorial jurisdiction of the District Forums.
4. A grievance is made before us that despite the clear dicta of the decisions of the State Commission, the District Forums are not abiding by the same and are dismissing complaints on ground of territorial jurisdiction in violation of binding findings.
5. It cannot be denied that judicial discipline mandates that the District Forums shall strictly abide by the decisions of the State Commission, which bind their consideration.’’
5. It is pertinent to mention here that the Hon’ble Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Prem Joshi Vs Jurasik Park Inn & Anr. First Appeal No. 488/2017 vide order dated 17.10.2017 held that:
“6. Now coming to the point of Delhi being one district, it may be mentioned that appellant has relied upon decision of this Commission dated 31.10.07 in RP No. 07/18 titled as Singhs Dental Hospital vs. Shri Amrit Lal Dureja and decisions of this Commission dated 17.03.10 in FA No. 10/220 titled as Holy Family Hospital vs. Amit Kumar, decision of this Commission in FA 216/2012 titled as Mahesh Ram Nath vs. the Secretary cum Commissioner (Transport) and other and decision in Sardar Saranjeet Singh vs. Anil Kumar Dixit III (2010) CPJ 181.
7. The District Forum distinguished the above decisions on the ground that the Hon’ble Lt. Governor of National Capital Territory of Delhi vide notification dated 20.04.99 divided Delhi in 10 districts defining their respective area. Notification was issued for being complied with instead of being flouted.
8. Obviously the purpose of defining jurisdiction was to regularize and distribute the work to bring certainty instead of creating chaos. If all the litigants prefer to chose one forum, that forum would be overburdened and remaining nine forums would become idle.
10. The Director, Consumer Affairs issued a circular No. F.50(21)/2003/F&S/CA/1053-1054 dated 07.11.12 conveying the feelings of National Commission regarding not following the notification in its letter and spirit. It was also conveyed that National Commission took a very serious view and stated that inspite of notification promulgated by Govt. of NCT of Delhi on 20.04.99 clearly demarcating jurisdiction district wise, District Forums were violating the order. On the basis of the said letter Registrar of this Commission wrote a letter No. F.1/(Misc.)/SC/2012/5045 dated 08.11.12 advising President, District Forums to strictly comply with the directions i.e. notification.’’
6. In view of the Judgment dated 01st February, 2018 of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court mandating that judicial discipline mandates that the District Forums shall strictly abide by the decisions of the State Commission, following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi State Commission in Prem Joshi (supra) being the latest on the said point, the present complaint be returned to the complainant for filing the same before the Forum of competent jurisdiction as neither OP is based within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum nor any part of cause of action is shown to have accrued within the territorial jurisdiction of this forum. File be consigned to record room.
Copy of the Order be given to the complainant free of cost.
Announced this 08th day of January, 2019.
(M.K. GUPTA) (POONAM MALHOTRA)
President Member
