Ms. Nipur Chandna (Member)

ORDER

19.12.2023

1.       The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging the deficiency in service on the part of OP. The complainant is the holder of Marine Cargo Open Ins. Policy bearing no. 6520006426 w.e.f. 09.11.2022 to 08.11.2023. The complainant booked the consignment with M/s H.K. Dech Technology Co. Ltd. for an amount of Rs. 88,70,618/-.

2.       On 07.01.2023 the consignment in question get destroyed during transit in Udaipur due to incident of fire, the intimation of which is duly given to OP Ins. Co. The surveyor of OP Co. visited the site and had assessed the loss. It is further alleged that the surveyor had approved the damage only to the extent of commercial value of Rs. 58,11,102/-. Despite the fact that there were three invoice of even date 06.12.2022, beside this OP-1 & 2 decline to approve IGST & Custom Duty payable on the commercial value by the complainant. On several occasions through emails as well as the letters and personal visits complainant repeatedly requested OP-1 company to consider the entire claim and release the claim in question but all in vain. Being aggrieved by the conduct of the OPs complainant approached this Commission for redressal of its grievance.

3.       The present complaint case is on admission stage. We have heard Ld. Counsel for complainant on the issue of territorial jurisdiction and have perused the record.

4.       In the array of parties the complainant company has mentioned the address of its branch office which is situated at Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar, Delhi-42. The address of OP-1mentioned in the array of parties is that of Kirti Nagr, Najafgarh Road, Delhi-15 and of OP-2 at Rohini, Delhi-85.

5.       It has been pleaded by complainant that OP-2 work for gain in the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission hence this Commission has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present complaint.

6.       The perusal of the record shows that the complainant has failed to place on record any documentary evidence in respect to the address of OP-2 falling within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. Moreover, the complainant company is insured with OP-1 who is liable to indemnify the complainant against the loss in question. The OP-2 is the surveyor appointed under IRDA Regulation and has no liability in respect to the claim in question.

7.       Admittedly neither the complainant nor OP-1 resides or work for gain within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. The complainant failed to place on record any evidence which shows that OP-2 falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission or any cause of action or part of cause of action arose within territorial jurisdiction  of this Commission.

8.       In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that this District Commission does not have  territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present complaint.  Let the complaint be returned to the complainant along with documents for presenting before appropriate Court/ Commission in accordance with Law. A copy of the complaint be retained for records. Complaint is accordingly, disposed off in above terms.          

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving the application from the parties in the registry.

Order be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

Announced in open Commission on   19.12.2023.

Sanjay Kumar               Nipur Chandna                       Rajesh

               President                            Member                         Member