Karnataka

Mysore

CC/10/16

Abraham prince John - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager, M/s.vacation credit card - Opp.Party(s)

18 Jan 2010

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM MYSORE
No.1542/F, Anikethana Road, C and D Block, J.C.S.T. Layout, Kuvempunagara, (Behind Jagadamba Petrol Bunk), Mysore-570009.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/10/16

Abraham prince John
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Manager, M/s.vacation credit card
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Sri A.T.Munnoli2. Sri. Shivakumar.J.

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

The complainant has filed the complaint, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and has claimed certain amount mentioned in the complaint. Considering the facts alleged in the complaint, we heard the complainant regarding territorial jurisdiction and perused the records. Now, we have to consider whether this Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint? For the following reasons, our finding is in negative. REASONS Opposite party is at Bangalore. The agreement entered into between the complainant and the opposite party is at Bangalore. The grievance of the complainant is that, as per the agreement, the opposite party did not provide the service. Consequently, the cause of action also arose at Bangalroe. Sub section 2 of section 11 of the C.P.Act reads as under:- “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 the 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 have a branch office), or personally work for gain, as the case may be, acquiesce in such institution; or (c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.” In view of the said provisions and the facts of the case on hand, we are of the considered opinion that, this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and proceed with the complaint. The complainant submitted that, he is the resident of Mysore. But, complaint shall have to be filed within the territorial jurisdiction, where the opposite party resides or cause of action arose. It is not provided under sub section 2 of section 11 of the C.P.Act, that complaint also can file where the complainant resides. Hence, the following order: ORDER The complaint is returned to the complainant for presentation before the proper Forum having territorial jurisdiction, in accordance with law.




......................Sri A.T.Munnoli
......................Sri. Shivakumar.J.