Delhi

New Delhi

CC/761/2013

Natraj Home Furnishing Pvt.Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. New India Assurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

16 Dec 2019

ORDER

 

 

 

           CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

       (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

                  ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

                                                           NEW DELHI-110001

 

Case No.C.C./761/2013                                                    Dated:

 In the matter of:

M/s Natraj Home Furnishing Pvt. Ltd.

Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director,

WX-114B, Todapur, Near Inder Puri

New Delhi - 110012

                                                                                              ……Complainant

 

        Versus

1.        New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director,

Head Office : 87, M G Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400001

 

2.     New India Assurance Company  Ltd.

Through Its Divisional Manager,

B-401 , AnsalChambers – I

Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi

 

3.  New India Assurance Company  Ltd.

Through ItsBranch Manager,

BO-310103, Green House

D.B. Gupta Road, New Delhi- 110005

                                                                               …….Opposite Parties

 

 

ARUN KUMAR ARYA – PRESIDENT

 

                                                            ORDER

 

The gist of this case is that the complainant has claimed for Rs. 5,62,523.26/- alonngwith 18% per annum interest and damages of harassment etc of Rs. 1,00,000/-, cost of litigation and also the pendantliteinterest.

OP filed written statement stating that  the claim of the complainant has already been settled  for Rs. 2,03,59082/- on 31/12/2012 and the payment was credited in favour of the complainant vide NEFT and therefore the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant and the OP filed their respective evidence. Oral arguments were also addressed by the parties.

During the course of argument the Ld. Counsel for OP has stressed upon and raised  the issue that this Forum does not have the pecuniary jurisdiction as out of the claimed amount, more than 2crores has already been credited in favour of the complainant and that this Forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaint  with subject matter of more than Rs. 20 lakhs.

The complainant  has argued that it is only the amount of Rs. 5,62,523.26/- which is the subject matter of the complaintand as such the complaint is well within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum.

The complainant has relied on the judgement of Vaaan Infra Pvt. Ltd. v/s Liberty Videocon General decided on 16/04/2018 by the Hon’ble National Commission for Consumer Case no. CC/3404/2017. The Hon’ble National Commission in the said case has held that “ It is the premium paid  to the Insurer which when added to the compensation claimed  in the complaint would determine the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission. The extent of sum assured would have no bearing on the determination of the pecuniary jurisdiction of a Consumer Forum. “

The Cl. For the OP on merit has argued that  once the claim has been settled, the same cannot be reopened and the complainant ceases to be a consumer under the provision of Consumer Protection Act.

The preliminary issue of pecuniary jurisdiction needs to be addressed at the outset  before going into the merit of the case.

From the judgement of the Hon’ble National Commission (Supra) clearly makes it clear mentions that  for the purposes of pecuniary jurisdiction, the compensation claimed and the premium paid  to the insurer are required to be taken into account of .

In the present case out of the claimed compensation, an amount more than 2 crores has already been given to the complainant and the complainant through the present complaint has prayed for the amount of Rs. 5,62,523.26/- deducted  by the insurer. In other words, the claim of the complainant in the present complaint is in addition to the amount of claim of more than 2 crores already credited in favour of the complainant by OP.

In view of above and in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission, we are of the considered view that the subject matter of the complaint  is much more than  the pecuniary jurisdiction of 20 lakhs  of this Forum. We therefore, hold that this Forum does not have the pecuniary jurisdiction  and as such  in the light of Tushar Batra Vs. M/S Unitech Limited decided on 26/04/2017, Case no.-299 of 2014 the complaint is returned  with liberty to file before appropriate Forum with following particulars :-

Date of presentation of complaint :-23/08/2013

 

Name of complainant :-  M/s Natraj Home Furnishing Pvt Ltd.

 

Date of return of complaint :-   16/12/2019

Office is directed to return the complaint along with annexures after retaining the copy of same for records.

Copy of the order be given Dasti to the parties.  File be consigned to record room.

 

Announced  in open Forum on  : 16/12/2019

 

 

 

 

          (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                                             PRESIDENT

 

          (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                                      (H M VYAS)

                             MEMBER                                                                                      MEMBER