Perused the case record. Date has been fixed to today for order on the maintainability petition filed by the O.Ps No. 1, 2, 3 & 7 through their legal representative Sri  Basanta  Kumar Mohanty.

               Sri Mohanty submitted that this disputed case hits under section 11 of C.P Act 1986. The petitioner has filed this case as the invoice price of the machine is Rs.30,00,000/- along with Rs.5,00,000/- towards mental agony and litigation. Which is beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Forum. As per section 21(a)(1) value of goods or service along with compensation is to be considered for deciding pecuniary jurisdiction of consumer Forum.  Hence he prays to dismiss the case as not maintainable.

         Complainant objected the petition and submitted that the Hydraulic pump and Turbo charges of the machine was old , damage and re-colored which cost is Rs. 3,00,000/- only.  That apart complainant needs Rs.5,00,000,/-  towards mental and physical agony , harassment , litigation expenses etc. So the cost of the dispute is valued at Rs. 8,00,000/- in total. Hence he prays to reject the petition.

   Perused the documents filed by the complainant . The TAX INVOICE CUM CHALLAN   provided  by TRIBENI ENGINEERS  No. TE/PUN/16-17  /66 dtd 03.01.2017 to consignee Ajaya Kumar Bhoi (Complainant)  shows that the value of the Hyundai Hydraulic Excavator Model –R80-7 is Rs.30,00,00,/-. Which is more than pecuniary jurisdiction of consumer Forum.

Section 11 of C.P Act . Jurisdiction of the District Forum.—(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed ''does not exceed rupees twenty lakhs. 

              Ambrish Kumar Shukla Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure & Ors. Decided on 07.10.2016  by three Member Bench of the National Commissin

“The pecuniary jurisdiction is linked to the value of the goods or service, and not to the cost/value of the defect/deficiency in the goods or service , as the case may be.”

              In the instant case , the complainant has  valued the defective parts of the machine as Rs.3,00,000/- and compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- total of Rupees comes to Rs.8,00,000/- . The defective parts of the machine forms a part of the total machine which cant not be considered in view of above cited decision of Hon’ble National Commission.

In this situation this Forum is prevented to proceed with the complaint as it comes under pecuniary jurisdiction. As such the objection filed by the complainant is not sustainable.

                  In view of the above facts and circumstances we are constrained to disallow the petition filed by the O.Ps No. 1,2,3 & 7. Accordingly the petition is allowed & the complaint is dismissed as not maintainable.