This complaint by M/s Premier Motor Garage, plot No.47, Indl. Area, Chandigarh is directed through Sh. Mohit Pratap Singh against the OPs, primarily to seek the insurance claim to the tune of Rs.34,00,584/- along with interest (as per insurance policy
Annexure C-2 ), besides the damage on account of loss of business and litigation expenses. 2. In nutshell facts culminating to the commencement of this complaint case may be recapitulated thus; The complainant who is a proprietorship concern and is authorized dealer of Hindustan Motors Ltd. OP No.3 having its dealership outlet at Chandigarh had booked two cars make Pajero BSIII DSL SFX Graphite with OP No.3 in May 2009 at Kadambathur, Distt. Tiruvellur, Tamil Nadu. The above mentioned two cars were duly insured under the Marine Insurance (New Policy) with OP no.1 vide policy bearing No. 414600/21/2010/13 valid from 01.5.2009 to 30.4.2010. Ultimately the two cars were dispatched by OP No.3 through OP No.2 M/s M.V. Logistic Pvt. Ltd. in Lorry No. HR-55G-5867 on 12.5.2009. On its way to Chandigarh the Lorry carrying two Pajero cars mentioned above had met with an accident at Rohtak (Haryana). In that behalf the parties were informed. Thereafter complainant requested to OP No.1 to depute a surveyor so that the insurance claim of the complainant be settled at the earliest as the cars were of high value but the complainant failed to get any positive response from OP No.1 and its insurance claim was also not processed. On these aforesaid allegations this complaint was moved before this Commission for seeking relief as indicated in the opening part of this order. 3. At the first instance a query was put to learned counsel for the complainant as to how the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission is made out to entertain and adjudicate upon the matter in issue. In response to that he relied upon the observation made by the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shimla in the case of Himachal Roads Transport Corporation Vs. Kandhari Rubber Ltd. 2004(2) CLT 618. to contend that since the destination of reaching of the cars was at Chandigarh, therefore, some part of cause of action be deemed to have arisen at Chandigarh. 4. We have gone through the above said ruling of the Hon’ble State Commission Himachal Pradesh at Shimla and find that the facts contained therein are quite at variance from the facts of the case in hand. Moreover, the complainant in the instant case is seeking the main relief against OP No.1 the oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Tiruvellur, Tamil Nadu. It is also pertinent to mention here that the insured name as given at page No. 17A (Marine Cargo Open Policy) is that of Hindustan Motors Ltd., i.e. OP No.3 and not of the complainant. Thus there is no document on the file, which could show any insurance policy of the said cars in its (complainant’s) name. Admittedly none of the opposite party is residing or carrying its business at Chandigarh. Not only that the damage to the two cars booked by the complainant had taken place in a accident which had occurred at Rohtak i.e. within the territorial jurisdiction of State Commission Haryana. It is also doubtful that the complainant who is a dealer of cars and earning commission by pursuing commercial activities could be covered under the Consumer Protection Act. In fact entire cause of action if any had taken at a place where both insured cars were damaged in an accident. Further from the facts as narrated above both the cars were insured at Tiruvellur in Tamil Nadu that too by OP No.3 and not by the complainant. 5. In view of our foregoing discussion and also by relying upon observations made by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1560 of 2004 titled as Sonic Surgical Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. decided on 20.10.2009, we are of the considered opinion that this Commission at Chandigarh has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon this complaint. Hence the same is hereby dismissed in limine. 6. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of charge.
| | MAJ GEN S.P.KAPOOR (RETD.), MEMBER | HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT | MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER | | 
