S.S. Sarna filed a consumer case on 03 Feb 2020 against M/S. HDFC Assets Management Company Ltd & Ors. in the New Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/208/2011 and the judgment uploaded on 05 Feb 2020.
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI
(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,
I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.
Case No.CC. 208/2011 Dated:
In the matter of:
S.S. Sarna,
S/o Lt. Sh. Deva Singh Sarna,
A-8/28, Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi-57
…Complainant
Versus
13, Tolstoy House, Connaught Place,
New Delhi-110001.
Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi.
Head Office-
Ramon House, 5th floor, 169, Bakbay Reclamation
Mumbai-400020
..… Opposite Parties
NIPUR CHANDNA-MEMBER
O R D E R
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP alleging the deficiency in services. It is alleged that on 27/12/2007 as per the agreement with OP-1 the complainant handed over the cheque bearing no. 188948 to OP-1 for a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- towards the capital commitment of Rs. 25,00,000/-. On several request, OP-1 provided the copy of the contract to the complainant that too several months later of the payment of Rs. 5,00,000/-. After going through the contract the complainant came to know that she would be liable for a exit load of 25% at any given point of time on an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- and an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- would be deducted towards the funds management and various other charges.
Being aggrieved by the terms of the contract, the complainant approached OP -1 to cancel the contract and refund the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- deposited by her. Despite her repeated follow up for refund nothing was heard from OP-1, as such she approached the insurance Ombudsman for redresssal of her grievance. Insurance Ombudsman vide its order dated 14/09/2009 directed the bank to allow the complainant to exit after charging the termination fee of 25% of Rs. 05,00,000/- without further levying any other charges. Being dissatisfied with the order of Insurance Ombudsman, complainant approach this Forum for redressal of her grievance.
Complaint has been contested by all the OPs. All the parties to the complaint filed their respective evidence by way of affidavit. We have heard arguments advance at the bar and have perused the file.
During the course of arguments, it is revealed that the subject matter of dispute i.e. the Capital commitment against which the agreement was signed and executed between the complainant and OP-1 was Rs. 25,00,000-/-, it exceeds the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum i.e. Rs. 20 lacs, as such, this Forum does not have Pecuniary Jurisdiction to entertain this complaint, in the light of Ambrish Kumar Shukla and Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Case no. 97 of 2016, decided by Hon’ble NCDRC on 07/10/2016 reported as Manu/CF/0499/16.
In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that this Forum does not have the Pecuniary Jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. Accordingly, the complaint be returned to the complainant along with annexures/ documents by retaining a copy of the same for records with liberty to file the same before the competent Forum as per the Law. The particulars in the light of the judgement of Hon’ble NCDRC in the matter of Tushar Batra & Anr. Vs. M/S Unitech Limited decided on 26/04/2017, Case no.-299 of 2014 are as follows.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to the parties.
Announced in open Forum on 03/02/2020.
File be consigned to record room.
(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)
PRESIDENT
(NIPUR CHANDNA) (H M VYAS)
MEMBER MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.