CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110016

    Case No.56/2024

JATIN YADAV

RESIDENT OF 356-A,

PANCHSHEEL COLONY,

FARIDABAD, HARYANA-121003.…..COMPLAINANT

Vs.   

M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

BRANCH OFFICE AT:-

INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,

MATHURA ROAD, DELHI-110044.

REGISTERED OFFICE:-

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS PARK,

OBEROI GARDEN CITY,

OFF. WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY,

GOREGAON, MUMBAI-400063..…..RESPONDENT

Date of Institution-14.02.2024

Date of Order- 22.03.2024

  O R D E R

MONIKA SRIVASTAVA– President

The Complainant who is the resident of Faridabad has filed the present complaint regarding an insurance claim and the policy issuing office is situated at Janakpuri, Delhi.

The preliminary issue for consideration before the complaint could be taken on merits is whether this Commission has the territorial jurisdiction to decide this complaint as evidently neither the complainant nor the OP are residing within the jurisdiction of this Commission.

The territorial jurisdiction of this Commission is invoked solely on the ground that the registered office of the OP is situated within the jurisdiction of this Commission. Section 34 (2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019 provides that a complaint may be instituted in any of the District Commission, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, wherein clauses (a) to (d) are attracted. Section 34 has been reproduced herein below

34. (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed one crore rupees:

Provided that where the Central Government deems it necessary so to do, it may prescribe such other value, as it deems fit.

(2) A complaint shall be instituted in a District Commission 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, ordinarily 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 the permission of the District Commission is given; or

(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises; or

(d) the complainant resides or personally works for gain.

(3) The District Commission shall ordinarily function in the district headquarters and may perform its functions at such other place in the district, as the State Government may, in consultation with the State Commission, notify in the Official Gazette from time to time.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sonic Surgical vs National Insurance Company Limited (2010) 2 SCC 135 while adjudicating section 17 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 categorically held that State Commission where the “branch office” of OP is situated would have jurisdiction to entertain complaints, only if cause of action had also arisen wherein branch office is situated. Thus, mere existence of branch office would not confer jurisdiction.

Relying on Sonic Surgical vs National Insurance Company Limited the Hon’ble NCDRC in Kaizad Marzban Baraiya vs National Insurance Ltd RP No. 2710/2015 held that:

Therefore, the place of registered office of respondent no.2 by itself shall not confer jurisdiction on the Consumer Forum which otherwise do not have the territorial jurisdiction.

Admittedly, in the facts of this case, no part of cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Commission. The policy was issued by the office of the OP situated at Janakpuri, Delhi. In the instant case, the complainant in his complaint has provided the jurisdiction to this Commission by virtue of the branch office office of the OP 1 at Mohan Co-operative, Mathura Road, Delhi and no cause of action has taken has taken place at this office.    

Since no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Commission, neither complainant nor OP resides or works for gain within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Commission. We are of the considered view that this Commission does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint and hence direct the same to be returned to be presented in court of competent jurisdiction.

File be consigned to record room after providing copy of the order to the parties.