IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> <br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi<br /> M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member<br /> <br /> 3. Shri. Shivakumar.J.<br /> B.A., L.L.B., - Member<br /> <br /> CC 87/10 DATED 22.03.2010<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant Sriram S/o late Nanjappa, No.1036, 4th Main, 10th cross, Vidyaranyapuram, Mysore-8.<br /> <br /> (In person)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> Opposite Party 1. The Branch Manager, LIC of India, Branch Office-1, B.O.Code-625, Shimoga-577201.<br /> 2. The Senior Branch Manager, LIC of India, Unit 119, Branch C-38, 2nd Floor, Shopping Complex, Opp. Moolchand Hospital, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110024.<br /> 3. The Branch Manager, LIC of India (H.O.) Bannimantap Extension, Mysore-570014. <br /> <br /> <br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 12.03.2010<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : <br /> Date of order : 22.03.2010<br /> Duration of Proceeding : <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> <br /> 1. Alleging certain deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant has filed the complaint. <br /> <br /> 2. Considering the facts alleged in the complaint and other material on record, we have heard the complainant regarding the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.<br /> <br /> 3. Now we have to consider whether this Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint?<br /> <br /> 4. For the following reasons, our find is in negative.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 5. As provided Under Section 11 of the C.P Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and the complainant shall institute the complaint within the local limits of who’s jurisdiction the opposite party or each of the opposite parties where there are more than one actually and voluntarily resides or carried on business or as a branch office or personally work for gain or the cause of action arise or in part arises.<br /> <br /> 6. In the second paragraph of the complaint, the complainant has alleged that, the cause of action accrued in Shimoga City where the complainant had purchased LIC policy. In 4th paragraph of the complaint, again it is stated, cause of action had accrued in Shimoga. Further, the first opposite party is Shimoga Branch of the LIC of India. In the second paragraph of the complaint, it is stated that, after the complainant purchased the policy from the first opposite party at Shimoga, the policy was transferred to the second opposite party branch at Delhi, causing deficiency in service, negligence of duty coupled with unfair trade practice. Hence, even according to the complainant, opposite parties 1 and 2 resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and secondly, cause of action also arose outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.<br /> <br /> 7. Now, the question would be the third opposite party branch at Mysore. On perusal of the facts alleged in the complaint and the documents on record, except the fact that the third opposite party branch is situated at Mysore within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum, no deficiency in service on the part of the third opposite party is made out and no cause of action arise at Mysore.<br /> <br /> 8. As could be seen from the facts alleged in the complaint, main grievance is that, in the policy, wrong name of some other person is mentioned and hence, it is prayed to issue fresh policy. As noted above, the first opposite party has issued the policy and that was later transferred to second opposite party at Delhi.<br /> <br /> 9. The fact that, third opposite party, one of the branches of the LIC of India is within the jurisdiction of the Forum, is no ground to hold that this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint. The transaction took place between the complainant and the first and the second opposite parties, particularly, the first opposite party which issued the policy.<br /> <br /> 10. Considering the facts, for the reasons noted above, we are of the opinion that, this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint. Hence, the following order.<br /> <br /> ORDER <br /> 1. The complaint is returned to the complainant to present it before the Forum having jurisdiction to entertain and try the same.<br /> <br /> 2. Give a copy of this order to complainant according to Rules.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 22nd March 2010)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> (Y.V.Uma Shenoi)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> (Shivakumar.J.)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br />