The case record is placed today for passing order in respect of petition filed by the O.P. No.1 to 4 dated 15.12.2017 heard on 18.1.2019.

            On perusal the record it appears that O.Ps. filed a petition on 15.12.2017 for maintainability point. In this petition the O.ps. stated that as per the terms of the agreement it was decided that if any dispute occurred between the parties the case shall be referred to the Arbitration.  But the complainant filed this case before this Forum.  So, as per agreement the complainant’s case is barred.  The O.Ps. further stated that the case is suffering from lack of pecuniary jurisdiction.  The complainant prays before this Forum refunding of total Rs.23,87,380/- (including interest) but this Forum has limit upto Rs.20,00,000/- only.  So, these O.ps. prayed before this Forum to reject the case on non-maintainability point.  They referred the case decision of National Commission in which the Hon’ble Commission in Ambarish Kumar Shukla & 21 others Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. in I (2017) CPJ 1(NC) held that consideration paid or agreed to be paid by consumer at the time of purchasing the goods or hiring or availing of the services, as the case may be, is to be considered, along with the compensation, if any, claimed in complaint, to determine the pecuniary jurisdiction of Consumer Forum.

            The complainant filed this case on 18.9.2017 stating that she purchased a flat from the O.P. No.1 by paying consideration money of Rs.13,11,800/- through cheque and cash and it was accepted and acknowledged by the O.P. No.1 to 4.  Thereafter the O.Ps. further demanded of Rs.62,119/- from the complainant for extra works.  As per their demand the complainant paid Rs.62,000/- to them. The complainant further stated  that after taking total amount of Rs.13,73,800/- the O.Ps. did not registered the said flat.  The complainant also expensed Rs.1,218/-, Rs.200/- & Rs.1,418/- for maintenance charges, parking charges from November, 2015 to January, 2016. The complainant several times requested to the O.Ps. to execute flat in her name but there was no result and finding no other alternative she filed this case before this Forum for relief with a prayer to refund Rs.13,87,780/- along with interest @18% from 25.3.2015 till realization and to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation and also to pay Rs.50,000/- as litigation cost.

            Hearing the argument as advanced by the Advocates of the parties and perusing the case record, document and decisions we are to discuss the matter regarding the maintainability of consumer complaint before the Consumer Forum.

            This Forum had occasion to consider the provisions of Consumer Protection Act as well as the Arbitration Act, 1996.  In Skypark Couriers Ltd. Vs. Tata Chemicals, IV (2000) SLT 494 (2000) 5 SCC 294, this Forum laid down the following:-

 “ Even if there exists an arbitration clause in an agreement and a complaint is made by the consumer, in relation to a certain deficiency of service, then the existence of an arbitration clause will not be a bar to the entertainment of the complaint by the Redressal Agency, constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, since the remedy provided under the Act is in addition to the provisions of any other law for the time being in force.”

            The case in hand in which the complainant prayed to refund of Rs.13,87,780/-  and after adding the reliefs as prayed in the prayer portion of the complainant the value as reckoned be Rs.23,87,380/- following the principle adopted by National Commission in Ambarish Kumar Shukla & 21 others Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., which is beyond the limit of this Forum.

            Thus the petition filed by the opposite parities on 15.12.2017 has merit and allowed on contest.  The complaint petition filed by the complainant deserved to be dismissed as not maintainable being beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum.

Order

Hence, it is ordered that the C.C. No.193/2017 be and the same is dismissed with a liberty to re-file the same before the appropriate forum having jurisdiction.

Let the plain copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.