1.                 This appeal filed by Sh. Keshwanand Joshi Son of Sh. Mukand Ram Joshi, complainant in this case is directed against the order dated 18.9.2009, whereby his complaint bearing No.993 of 2009 was dismissed by the District Forum-II for want of territorial jurisdiction.

2.                In brief, facts culminating to the commencement of this appeal may be recapitulated thus; 

                    Complainant wanted to purchase a “Martand Panchang Satapadi (100 years)” book.  Sh. B.L. Sharma went to the Shop of OP for purchase of the book on behalf of the Complainant. Sh. B.L. Sharma asked for the abovementioned book but the OP gave a different book
“Ganak Martand” which was worth Rs.1000/-.  The complainant on the next day requested the OP to provide the desired book and refund the remaining amount. But the OP rejected the request of the Complainant, which amounted to deficiency in service.   On these allegations the complainant sought replacement of the book or in the alternative to refund its price of Rs.1000/- along with interest @18% besides compensation and litigation expenses.

3.                On the other hand the case of the Opposite party (hereinafter referred to as OP) is that Sh. B.L. Sharma had asked for “Martand Panchang Satappadi (100 years)”. But, there was no book with such name.  However, the OP told to Sh. B.L. Sharma that he had a book having same features titled as “Ganak Martand’.   The OP further stated that Sh. B.L. Sharma had talked with someone on telephone and asked for the said book i.e. ‘Ganak Martand’. Thus, the book ‘Ganak Martand was given to Sh. B.L. Sharma  @ Rs.1000/-. The OP submitted that there was no deficiency on its part and the complaint deserved to be dismissed.

4.                Learned District Forum after hearing counsel for the parties and going through the material placed on the file dismissed the complainant as indicated in opening part of this complaint.

5.                Aggrieved by the impugned order of learned District
Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh the complainant has come up in this appeal. 

6.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the material on the file. The only point raised on behalf of the complainant/appellant is that, since the book was delivered at Chandigarh, the District Forum had the jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the matter.   This contention however has been repelled by learned counsel for the OP/respondent.

7.                We have given our thoughtful consideration to the above submission and find no force in the plea put forward on behalf of Complainant, inasmuch as it is the case of the complainant himself that he had sent Mr. B.L. Sharma to the shop of the OP at Panchkula for purchasing the said book.  Ultimately, the book was purchased and received by Mr. B.L. Sharma at Panchkula.  Admittedly the OP is also residing and running its business only at Panchkula, so what to talk of whole cause of action, even a part of cause action has not arisen in any manner within the territorial jurisdiction of Chandigarh.  Thus without going into any further details of the case, this appeal is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs of litigation.

8.                Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of charge.