Delhi

New Delhi

CC/330/2013

Dhananjay Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. The Branch Manager, Citi Bank - Opp.Party(s)

09 Apr 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/330/13                                Dated:

In the matter of:

Mr. Dhananjay Singh,

165A, Yamaha Vihar, Gautam Budh Nagar,

Sector-49, Noida-201301

Also at:

Opera Solutions,

5^th FL, ETT Tower1, Plot no.15 & 16,

Sector-16A, Film City, Noida-201301

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

1. The Branch Manager,

CitiBank, Jeevan Bharti Building,

124, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001

 

2. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Head Office at

GE Plaza, Airport Road,

Yerawada, Pune-411006

                                         ……..OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

ORDER

Member: Ritu Garodia

The short fact of alleged deficiency is that complainant had taken insurance policy with OP2 Company for 10 years. His salary account was deducted by Rs.1,500/- by OP1. The policy was to mature after 10 years for total sum assured of Rs.7,20,000/-. However, complainant surrendered the policy after 2years due to financial constraints and received Rs.29,015/- as surrender value.

Scrutinizing of record reveals that OP2 office is situated in Pune, Citi’s Bank representative went to complainant’s office in Noida for salary account. Complainant has no where specified the branch of Citi bank where he was a policy holder but merely stated the registered office of Citi Bank is at Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001

The relevant Section of Consumer Protection Act is reproduced as under:

“1.       Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed (does not exceed rupees twenty lakhs).

2.        A complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction-

(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

(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, 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

(c) The cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sonic Surgical Vs. NIC (2009) CPJ 40 SC has opined that

“It is well settled that expression cause of action means bundle of facts which gives rise to liability.”

The above mentioned case also explained the concept of cause of action as “each and every fact pleaded by respondents in their application does not ipso facto lead to the conclusion that those facts give rise to a cause of action within the Court’s territorial jurisdiction unless those facts pleaded are such which have a nexus or relevance with the lis that is involved in the case. Facts which have no bearing with the lis or the dispute involved in the case, do not give rise to a cause of action so as to confer territorial jurisdiction on the Court concerned.”

In Melanie Das Vs. Royal Sundram Alliance Insurance Co. & Others I (2014) CPJ 302 (NC) National Commission has held,

“Mere existence of Branch Office of a Company would not ipso facto be determinative of territorial jurisdiction. The cause of action must also arise at that place. Pithily stated, both the said conditions have been held to be cumulative and not independent of each other.”

Thus, no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of New Delhi District Forum and hence, Complainant is dismissed with liberty to file a fresh complaint on the same subject matter in appropriate Forum.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

 

        Pronounced in open Court on 09.04.2015.

 

                   

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(S.R. CHAUDHARY)                         (Ritu Garodia)

MEMBER                                                   MEMBER