Orissa

Malkangiri

67/2014

B.Gupteswar Rao, S/O B.Satya Rao, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director/Chief Executive officer,ICICI Bank Limited, - Opp.Party(s)

Sri Rathi Krushna Patro, Advocate,

29 Sep 2014

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. 67/2014
( Date of Filing : 20 Mar 2014 )
 
1. B.Gupteswar Rao, S/O B.Satya Rao,
Prasad Rao Peta, Jeypore at present residing At. kumutiguda, Malkangiri PS/Dist-Malkangiri.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Managing Director/Chief Executive officer,ICICI Bank Limited,
ICICI Bank Tower, Bandra-Kurla complex, Mumbai-400051
2. Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Limited,
Jeypore Branch, Jeypore, Koraput, Odisha.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Ashok Kumar Pattnaik PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Bhavani Acharya MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 29 Sep 2014
Final Order / Judgement

 

The Complainant is pertaining to deficiency in service on the part of Ops for repudiating the mortgaged ornaments.

The factual matrix of complaint is that complainant had taken gold loan of Rs. 89,175/- from the opposite Party No-2 and while the complainant is repeatedly visitin the to the Opposite Party No-2 for repayment of loan together with interest the OP No-2 did not responds to the complainant.

Ops in their W.S has raised the plea of territorial jurisdiction and that since the complainant did not turn up to pay the dues or to renew the loan facility, the pledged gold ornament was auctioned on 26.07.2013 for a sum of Rs. 87,650/-

Careful perusal of pleadings and documents reveals that the transactions were made at Jeypore in the District of Koraput which does not come within the territorial jurisdiction of Malkangiri District Forum.

The relevant Section of Consumer Protection Act is reproduced as under :

“1. Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed (does not exceed rupees twenty lakhs).

2. A complaint shall be instituted 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, 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.

It is well settled law that complaint can be filed only at that place if cause of action has arisen within local limits, thereof. The complaint could have been filed at Malkangiri District Forum only if a part of cause of action has arisen at that place. All the facts in complaint occurred at Jeypore in the District of Koraput and as such could not be entertained at Malkangiri District Forum as no part of cause of action has arisen here.

Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed with liberty to file a fresh complaint on the same subject matter in appropriate Forum.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

Pronounced in Open Court on 29th September, 2014.  

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Ashok Kumar Pattnaik]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Bhavani Acharya]
MEMBER
 

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.