IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi<br /> M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member<br /> 3. Shri. Shivakumar.J.<br /> B.A., L.L.B., - Member<br /> CC 31/10 dated 25.03.2010<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant Gundachar.S<br /> S/o Srikantachar, No.1376/1, Chamundeswari Nagar, Mandya City.<br /> <br /> (By K.V.Sheshadri, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> <br /> Opposite Party M/s Srirama Transport Finance Company Limited, No.20/L20, Shivaji Road, Near Ganesha Temple, N.R.Mohalla, Mysore-570007.<br /> (EXPARTE)<br /> <br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 30.01.2010<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : EXPARTE<br /> Date of order : 25.03.2010<br /> Duration of Proceeding : -<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. The complainant has filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act, seeking direction to the opposite party to return the original documents pertaining to KA-06/8366 and to hand over possession of the lorry and pay damages of Rs.89,500/-.<br /> <br /> 2. In the complaint amongst other facts, it is alleged that, the complainant has purchased the lorry KA-06/8366 raising loan of Rs.2,50,000/- from the branch office of the opposite party at Channapatna on 03.09.2007. The loan was to be repaid in installments. At the time of availing the loan, blank cheques. on demand promote, blank bond papers etc., were obtained. The lorry met with an accident. The complainant paid only 5 installments. He was ready to pay the complaint in one lumpsum. The opposite party did not agree to receive. On 20.08.2008, some Gundas and agents of the opposite party, when the vehicle was moving at bypass of Hassan, illegally without notice to the complainant, seized the same. Further, without intimation to the complainant, lorry was sold on 19.11.2008 for Rs.1,25,000/- for meager amount to the bill collector of the opposite party. On 31.12.2008, complainant received arbitration notice that an advance of Chennai is to be appointed as an arbitrator. If any award is passed, it is not biding on the complainant. For these reasons, it is prayed to allow the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. Despite due service of the notice, opposite party has remained absent and is set exparte.<br /> <br /> 4. To prove the facts alleged in the complaint, power of attorney holder of the complainant has filed his affidavit and certain documents are produced. We have heard the learned advocate for the complainant and perused the records. <br /> <br /> <br /> 5. Now, the points arises for consideration are as under:-<br /> 1. Whether this Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to try the complaint?<br /> 2. If so, whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and that he is entitled to the reliefs sought?<br /> 3. What order?<br /> <br /> 6. Our findings are as under:-<br /> Point No.1 : Negative.<br /> Point No.2 : Does not survive.<br /> Point No.3 : As per the order.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 7. Admittedly, the complainant has borrowed loan from the branch of M/s Sriram Transport Finance Company Ltd., Channapatna. The head office of the finance is at Chennai. From the Xerox copies of the hire purchase, lease acknowledgement slip, further it can be seen that, hire purchase is between the complainant and the administrative registered office situated at Chennai through branch office situated at Channapatna in Mandya District. Hence, one fact is crystal clear that, complainant availed loan from the branch office of Sriram Transport Finance Company Ltd., situated at Channapatna, outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.<br /> <br /> 8. During the course of arguments, learned advocate for the complainant submitted that, branch office of the said finance is also situated at Mysroe, which is made a party to the present proceedings and as such, this Forum has jurisdiction to try the complaint.<br /> <br /> 9. Sub Section 2 of section 11 of the Consumer Protect Act, 1986 deals with jurisdiction of the Forum. It reads as under:-<br /> “A complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction – <br /> (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<br /> (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:<br /> 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<br /> (c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.”<br /> <br /> Hence, it is clear that, complaint shall be instituted in District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction opposite party is situated or carries on business or cause of action wholly or in part, arose. In the case hand, admittedly, the complainant has borrowed loan from the branch office situated at Channapatna and not from the opposite party branch. Accordingly to the complainant when the vehicle was moving at bypass of Hassan, was seized and later sold etc., Hence, no cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Forum.<br /> <br /> 10. We feel it not necessary to quote number of decisions on the point. It is suffice to note, the recent decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2010 CTJ 2 wherein it is held that, <br /> “The expression ‘branch office’ in the amended section 17(2) of the C.P.Act means the branch office where the cause of action has arisen. It will lead to absurd consequences of bench hunting if the complainant is allowed to file complaint anywhere in India where the branch office of the complainant is situated.”<br /> <br /> In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the said ruling, the opposite party branch situated at Mysore is nothing to do with the loan transaction between the complainant and the Channapatna branch and further, no cause of action arose, within the jurisdiction of this Forum. Hence, we are of the consideration opinion that, this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to decide the present complaint.<br /> <br /> 11. Learned advocate for the complainant when question regarding territorial jurisdiction, made submission that, the Forum ought to have raised the question at the threshold at the time of admission of the complaint. But, the fact that, a complaint or plaint has been admitted by the Forum or Court having no territorial jurisdiction does not mean that, the Forum or Court gets jurisdiction and thereafter, it cannot be considered. <br /> <br /> 12. Suppose that from the averments made in the plaint or complaint, it is not made out that it is time barred, but on appearance of the defendant or the opposite party, certain facts or documents are produced, which makes beyond doubt that the plaint or complaint is time barred. Under such circumstance, can it be said that since initially plaint or complaint was admitted and later clearly it was found time barred, the Court or Forum has no jurisdiction at all to deal with that point? Further, take an example that in the plaint or complaint dismissal of earlier case between the same parties on the same set of facts or cause of action was not mentioned, but on appearance of the opposite party, that was brought to the notice of the Court or Forum, then can it be said that the Court or Forum having once admitted the plaint or complaint cannot consider the point of maintainability?<br /> <br /> 13. There cannot be any dispute that to certain extent whenever necessary, we have to adopt and follow various provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. Under order 7 Rule 10 CPC, it is provided that at any stage of the suit, the complaint can be returned. Hence, even at this stage, if it is found that the Forum has no territorial jurisdiction, the complaint can be returned. As regards, stage of taking objection about jurisdiction, what is provided under section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that no objection as to the place of suing shall be allowed by the Appellate or Revisional Court, unless that was taken in the Court at the fist instance. Hence, if in the Court at first instance, objection as to the place of suing was not taken then only in the appellate or revisional Court, party is not allowed to take such contention. Now, matter is for consideration in the Forum at the first instance. <br /> <br /> 14. Also, it is relevant to note that proviso to sub-section 2 section 11 of the Consumer Protection Act provides that with permission of the Forum, complaint can be lodged, in case the opposite parties do not reside within its jurisdiction. In the case on hand, admittedly no such permission was sought by the complainants and this Forum has not granted any permission as provided therein.<br /> <br /> 15. Considering the facts, material on record and the discussion made here before, we are of the opinion that, this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to decide the complaint. Accordingly, our finding on the above point is in negative.<br /> <br /> 16. Point No.2:- In view of the finding on the first point, this point will not survive for consideration.<br /> 17. Point No.3:- From the discussion made here before and conclusion arrived at, we pass the following order:-<br /> <br /> ORDER <br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is returned to the complainant as this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to decide it.<br /> 2. The complainant is at liberty to present the complaint before the Forum having jurisdiction.<br /> 3. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 25th March 2010)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Y.V.Uma Shenoi)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (Shivakumar.J.)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />