Orissa

StateCommission

CC/31/2022

Puspanjali Behera - Complainant(s)

Versus

Max Life Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. J. Sahu & Associates

07 Nov 2022

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
ODISHA, CUTTACK
 
Complaint Case No. CC/31/2022
( Date of Filing : 28 Oct 2022 )
 
1. Puspanjali Behera
Vill- Baitalbhata, P.O/P.S-Jagdalpur, Dist-Bargarh
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Max Life Insurance Company Ltd.
Represented through senior Manager Claim, 2nd Floor, 90A, Sector-18, Udyog Vihar, Gurugram,Hariyana, Pin-122015
2. Branch Manager, Max Life Insurance Company Ltd.
Udit Nagar, Rourkela, Dist.: Sundargarh
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. D.P. Choudhury PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Pramode Kumar Prusty. MEMBER
 HON'BLE MS. Sudihralaxmi Pattnaik MEMBER
 
PRESENT:M/s. J. Sahu & Associates, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 07 Nov 2022
Final Order / Judgement

                    Heard learned counsel for the complainant. He submits that he has paid the premium for Rs.24,101/- but the sum assured is of   Rs.1,00,00,000/-.  He submitted that he has asked for total amount of Rs.1,01,50,000/-. Further he submitted that he has already filed the consumer complaint before the learned District Commission, Bargarh but they observed that due to pecuniary jurisdiction the complaint is not maintainable. According to the order passed by the learned District Commission, Bargarh they have filed the complaint case here. But during time of admission he conceded that as per Section-47 (1)(a) of the C.P.Act,2019, for the purpose of the pecuniary jurisdiction,  the amount  payment  made for the value of goods or service has to be  computed and accordingly he submitted to pass appropriate order.

 2.                Considered the submission of learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the complaint and the impugned order passed by the learned District Commission, Bargarh. Section 34(1) of the C.P. Act, 2019  which is as follows:-

Subject to the other provision of the Act, the District Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed fifty lakh rupees.”

Section-47(1)(a) (i) of the C.P.Act,2019 is as follows:-

                 “To entertain Complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration, exceeds fifty lakh but does not exceed two crore rupees.

3.                In view of aforesaid provision, the pecuniary jurisdiction would be decided as per the value  of goods or services paid. In the instant case the  complainant admittedly paid Rs.24,101/- as premium for the sum assured of Rs.1,00,00,000/-. So, it was rightly filed before the learned District Commission, Bargarh.  We, therefore hereby direct learned counsel for the complainant to file the complaint before the learned District Commission, Bargarh within 21 days who will consider same without raising issue on the point of this pecuniary jurisdiction. Return the complaint with Anenxures filed before the State  Commission at once to file same before the learned District Commission, Bargarh within the stipulated period.

                   The Complaint case is disposed of accordingly.

                 Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.  

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Dr. D.P. Choudhury]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Pramode Kumar Prusty.]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MS. Sudihralaxmi Pattnaik]
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.