West Bengal

Jalpaiguri

CC/71/2024

SRI SHATRUGHAN YADAV - Complainant(s)

Versus

MERCEDES BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD. (Erstwhile known as M/s Daimler Financial services - Opp.Party(s)

SRI ROSHAN KUMAR JHA

22 Aug 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
JALPAIGURI
 
Complaint Case No. CC/71/2024
( Date of Filing : 16 Aug 2024 )
 
1. SRI SHATRUGHAN YADAV
S/o Sri Siyaram Yadav R/o Tulsipur, Kharik Tulsipur, Jamunia Dist. & P.S Bhagalpur, Bihar 853202
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. MERCEDES BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD. (Erstwhile known as M/s Daimler Financial services India Pvt. Ltd.) Represented by its C.E.O. & Authorized Signatory
At 5th Floor, Plot No. 8, Baashyam Thiru VI Ka Induatrial Space, Guindy, Chennai, Tamilnadu 600032
2. Subham Parking Yard, Represented by its Proprietor/Signatory
At Fulbari Parking Zone, P.O Fulbari P.S NJP Dist. Jalpaiguri 734004
Jalpaiguri
WEST BENGAL
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. Arundhaty Ray PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. DEBANGSHU BHATTACHARJEE MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 22 Aug 2024
Final Order / Judgement

Today is fixed for hearing on admission point. Ld. Lawyer for the Complainant is present by filing hazirah and also submitted the facts of the case. Complainant files an Inventory Slip which reflects that the Complainant and the O.P. both the permanent residents of Tulshipur, Kharik, Tulsipur, Jamunia, Dist & P.S. Bhagalpur in the State of Bihar- 853202  and Tamil Nadu.

The cause of action are fully arose on that particular area which situated at Fulbari Parking Zone, Fulbari, Police Station NJP, Dist. Jalpaigui- 734004

According to the Consumer Protection Act 2019 the Territorial Jurisdiction is described as under

Section 34. (2) A complaint shall be instituted in a District Commission within the local limits of whose jurisdiction,-

 

  1. The Opposite Party or each of the Opposite Parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, ordinarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain: or
  2. 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 the permission of the District Commission is given: or
  3. The cause of action, wholly or in part, arises: or
  4. The complainant resides or personally works for gain.

After hearing the Ld. Lawyer for the complainant and on going through the materials on record it needs to be mentioned, that the case is not under the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission as prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and therefore, the same cannot be admitted.

 

Hence, it is

                                    O R D E R E D

That the instant case C.C. No. 71 of 2024 be and the same is dismissed as the case in not under the territorial jurisdiction of this commission. Prayer for admission stands refused. The case thus is disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be handed over to the complainant free of cost.

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Arundhaty Ray]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. DEBANGSHU BHATTACHARJEE]
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.