KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 APPEAL NO.302/13

JUDGMENT DATED:05.10.2013

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                       :  PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE                                                                   : MEMBER

Subramanian,

S/o Velu, Kalathiparambil House,                                   

Tulsi Nagar, Guruvayoor, Thrissur.

                                                                             : APPELLANTS

Anietha,

W/o Subramanian, Kalathiparambil House,

Tulsi Nagar, Guruvayoor, Thrissur.

Both are represented by Power of Attorney

Holder- Soman V.H, Vanpully House,

Thaikkad.P.O, Guruvayoor, Thrissur.

(By Adv: Sri.S.Reghukumar)

          Vs.

HDFC Bank Ltd.,

HDFC Bank house,

Senapati Bapat Marg,                                                 : RESPONDENT

Lower Parel (West) Mumbai,

PIN – 400 013.

(By Adv: Sri.T.L. Sreeram)

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI.P.Q. BARKATH ALI : PRESIDENT

This is an appeal filed by the complainant in an unnumbered CC. Of CDRF, Thrissur against the order of the Forum dated, July 26, 2011 rejecting the complaint.

2.      The complainants are the parents of deceased Arunlal.K.Subramonian who was residing at Bangalore.  He was a holder of debit/credit card issued by the respondent bank.  The cardholder has a personal insurance coverage of Rs.5 lakhs.  On January 31, 2010 son of the complainant died in a motor accident within the territorial limits of KRP Dam Police station in Tamilnadu.

3.          The Forum rejected the complaint on the ground that the accident occurred in Tamilnadu and the respondent bank is in Mumbai and that therefore Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.  For several reasons we are of the view that the above view taken by the Forum is not correct.  Sec.11(2)( c ) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 clearly provides that a complainant can be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of territorial jurisdiction, the cause of action wholly or in parts arises.  In the present case the documents produced along with the complaint copies of which were produced in this appeal shows that the claim has been made by the complainant from Thrissur.  There were several communications between the complainants and the opposite party bank which shows that part of cause of action has arisen in Guruvayoor within the territorial jurisdiction of the Forum.  That apart respondent bank has a branch office at Thrissur.  Sec.11(2)(b) of the Act, provides that complaint can be instituted in a District Forum if the opposite party is having a branch office within the local limits of jurisdiction of the Court.  It is clear from the above that Forum has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

In the result appeal is allowed.  The impugned order of the Forum rejecting the complaint is set aside.  It is held that Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.  The Forum is directed to take the complaint on file and proceed in accordance with law.  Both parties shall appear before the Forum on 30.11.2013.

JUSTICE P.Q. BARKATHALI:  PRESIDENT

V.V. JOSE          : MEMBER

VL.