Punjab

Amritsar

CC/15/283

Sharad Jha - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. DATAWIND Innovations Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

08 Oct 2015

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
SCO 100, District Shopping Complex, Ranjit Avenue
Amritsar
Punjab
 
Complaint Case No. CC/15/283
 
1. Sharad Jha
R/o T-4, 64-D, Anuasha Colony near Phase II, Rawat Bhata, District Chittorgarh
Chittorgarh
Rajasthan
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/s. DATAWIND Innovations Ltd.
PO 563, Baba Deep Singh Complex, East Mohan Nagar, Amritsar
Amritsar
Punjab
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Sh. Bhupinder Singh PRESIDENT
  Kulwant Kaur MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

Present : Sh.Uma Shankar, Adv.counsel for the complainant

Sh.Manish Prashar,Adv.counsel for the opposite parties No.1 & 2

 

ORDER :

 

During the course of arguments, it has been pointed out by the counsel for the opposite parties No.1 & 2 that complainant is resident of T-4 64-D, Anuasha Colony, Near Phase II, Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh ( Rajasthan ) and he purchased the product i.e.Akash Tablet online at Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh ( Rajasthan ) from opposite party No.2 which has its office at Gurgoan. Product was also delivered to the complainant at Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh ( Rajasthan ). The said product became defective and the complainant sent the said product from his residence at Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh ( Rajasthan ) to opposite party No.2 at Gurgoan for repair as is evident from the receipt filed by the complainant ex.C-3. E-mails were also sent by the complainant to the opposite party No.2 from his residence at Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh ( Rajasthan ). Even all the correspondence was also made by the complainant from Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh ( Rajasthan ) to opposite party No.2 at Gurgoan. No cause of action has accrued to the complainant at Amritsar (Punjab ). Counsel for the complainant could not rebut these points raised by the counsel for the opposite parties No.1 & 2. Counsel for the complainant has simply stated that there is branch office of the opposite party No.2 at Amritsar i.e.opposite party No.1. So, complainant has filed the present complaint at Amritsar. This plea of the counsel for the complainant is not tenable because it is well settled law that a complaint can be filed only in the territorial jurisdiction of the Consumer Forum where cause of action has accrued or any part of cause of action has accrued. But no cause of action or any part of cause of action has accrued to the complainant at Amritsar. As such, this Consumer Forum at Amritsar has no territorial jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint. The territorial jurisdiction to file this complaint is either at Chittorgarh or at Gurgoan.

Resultantly, we hold that the present complaint is not maintainable because of lack of territorial jurisdiction. Therefore, this complaint is ordered to be returned to the complainant with liberty to file the same at appropriate Consumer Forum having territorial jurisdiction. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. Papers are ordered to be consigned to the record room.

 

8.10.2015 President

 

 

Member (K)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
[ Sh. Bhupinder Singh]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Kulwant Kaur]
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.