29.05.2023

ORDER ON ADMISSION

Mr. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Heard advocate for complainant on admission. 

2.      On perusal of the complaint and documents, we noticed that the complainant has paid one time premium amount of Rs.4,21,643=31 to the Opposite Party insurance company.  Hence, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the complaint is lies before the District Commission as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. 

3.      In this regard, it is appropriate to refer a Order dt.28.08.2020 passed in Consumer Case No.833/2022 of Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the matter between M/s Pyaridevi Chabiraj Steels Pvt. Ltd., v/s National Insurance Company Ltd., & 3 others wherein it is held as under;

 “The pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Commission, State Commission or National Commission, the value of the goods or services paid as consideration alone has to be taken and not the value of the goods or services purchased/ taken.  Therefore, we are of the view that the provision of Section 58(1)(a)(i) of the Act of 2019 are very clear and does not call for any two interpretations”.

4.      Hence, the complaint is hereby returned to the complainant along with documents with liberty to file the same before the District Commission.  The Court Fee paid before this Commission is sufficient to file the complaint before the District Commission.

                Sd/-                                             Sd/-

(Sunita .C. Bagewadi)                      (Ravishankar)       

Member                               Judicial Member                                               

KCS*