DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK

Dated the 11^th day of June, 2019

C.D Case No. 120 of 2016

                                                   Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President

                                                                2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member

                                                                3. Afsara Begum, Member

Pradipta Kishore Nayak

S/o: Probodh Kumar Nayak,

At: Kamaria,

Po: Mangalpur,

Ps/Via: Tihidi,

Dist: Bhadrak

At present: Indian Air Force Station, LEH, Jammu and Kashmir,

Service as Officer of the Indian Air Force,

State: Jammu and Kashmir

                                                        ……………………. Complainant

            (Versus)

1. The Concerned Authority

Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd.,

F- 24, Parim Pura Fruit Mandi, Truck,

Terminal, Srinagar, Pin- 190017

State: Jammu and Kashmir

2. The Concerned Authority

Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd.,

Set Floor, Plot No- 20, Survey No- 12,

Kothaguda, Kandapur, Hyderabad- 500084,

State: Telengana, India

3. The Concerned Authority

Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd.,

Plot No- 503/Nakhara, N.H- 5,

Opposite Lakheswar Filling Station,

Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khordha, Pin- 752101

4. The Concerned Authority

Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd.,

At/Po/Ps: Panikoili, Near N.H- 5

Dist: Jajpur, Pin- 755043, Odisha

                                                          …………………………..Opp. Parties

Counsel For Complainant: Mr. Gopinath Dash, Adv   

Counsel For the O.Ps No. 1, 2 & 4:  Set Ex-parte

Counsel For the OP No. 3:  Sri S. K. Mishra & Others

Date of hearing: 30.04.2010

Date of order: 11.06.2019

AFSARA BEGUM, MEMBER

This allegations raised by the complainant is deficiency in service. The complaint alleged that he is service in Indian Air Force at LEH, Jammu and Kashmir. During his service on 02.08.2016 he sent some house hold articles for his old parents, residing at Jajpur Town through courier service Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd., F- 24, Parim Pura Fruit Mandi, Truck,Terminal, Srinagar, Pin- 190017.  Which branch office is situated At- Panikoili, Dist- Jajpur, Odisha. But the afore said items were not served to his old parents at Jajpur Town.

The complainant met the OP No. 4 and asked about the courier which was sent by him bearing Docket No- 433542981. But the staff of OP No. 4 approached the complainant to receive another one, Docket No- 433543001, which was not sent by him. So the complainant refused to receipt the same. The OP No. 4 assured the complainant to supply aforesaid Docket. But no result was found. On the other hand the OP No. 4 avoid the complainant.

The OP appeared submitted written version and vehemently objected the complaint on the ground, territorial jurisdiction of the Forum.

After going through the records we come to the conclusion that there is no territorial jurisdiction of the Forum.

On the ground that a complaint may be filed in the Forum within whose local limits:-

1. The OP resides, when more than one OP any one of them resides or carries on business the party may have a branch office or personal works to gain in the local limits or,

2. The cause of action arisen whether wholly or party.

3. It can also be stated that for the purpose consumer complaints relating to normal contacts for services and goods the cause of action shall arise at any of the following places.

i. Where the contract is performed or shall be performed.

ii. Where the contract is made.

iii. Where acceptance of contract is communicated.

iv. Where the consideration money as per the contract is either paid or payable.

v. Where repudiation of the contract, if any, is received.

After going through the records we come to the conclusion that there is no jurisdiction of the complainant to raise his allegation.

Because the complainant alleged in his complaint that he sent some house hold article to his old parent from Jammu and Kashmir to Jajpur Town. So, and the cause of action arose in Jajpur Town. The address of the OP No. 1 to OP No. 4 mentioned in complaint, also out of station. Neither the O.Ps nor the branch office of the O.Ps is in Bhadrak jurisdiction.

The complainant himself is in service in Jammu and Kashmir, permanent address of the complainant mentioned in the complaint is not relevant to the dispute.

Based on the evaluation of the facts and as come to our notice, we justifiable come to the conclusion that the complaint is not maintainable. Hence it is ordered;

ORDER​

The complaint be and the same is dismissed on contents against the O.Ps but in the circumstances without cost. The complainant is directed to submit the dispute in proper Forum.

This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 11^th June, 2019 under my hand and seal of the Forum.