PER SHRI. S.M. RATNAKAR – HON’BLE  PRESIDENT

1)        The Complainant by this complaint has prayed that the Opposite Party be directed to pay Rs.17,25,000/- being the insurance claim amount payable under the Jewellers Block Policy with interest @ 18% p.a. from 01/04/1999 till it’s realization.  It is also prayed that the Opposite Party be directed to pay compensation for mental agony, harassment, hardship and losses suffered by the Complainant to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/- and cost of Rs.30,000/- towards legal and incidental expenses incurred by the Complainant. 

2)        The Complainant has alleged detailed loss suffered by the Complainant and prayed that on the basis of the submission of claim by the Complainant to the Opposite Party in view of the insurance policy obtained by the Complainant filed at Exh.‘A’ the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs as mentioned in para no.1 of this order.

3)        The Opposite Party by filing written statement contested the claim in detail on the basis of the terms and conditions of the policy as well as the latches and lacunas on the part of the Complainant.  The Opposite Party also contended that the complaint filed by the Complainant ought not to be entertained by this Forum and consequently the same may be dismissed with the cost.

4)        We heard the oral argument of Adv. Smt. Rashmi Manne, on behalf of Shri. Uday Wavikar, Ld.Advocate for the Complainant. The Advocate for the Opposite Party M/s. Narichania and Narichania remained absent at the time of oral argument.

5)        Upon going through the reliefs claimed by the Complainant as noted in para 1 of this order without going to the merits of this case it is necessary for this Forum whether this Forum has pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint. We find the answer to this point or question in the negative as the Complainant has prayed the amount of Rs.17,25,000/- from the Opposite Party being the insurance claim amount payable under the policy with interest @18% p.a. from 01/04/1999 till realization.  It is material to note that this complaint is filed on 26/10/2005.  As claimed by the Complainant even if the interest per year is roughly calculated it comes to Rs.3,10,500/-.  In fact, it was necessary for the Complainant to calculate the interest from the rate from which he is claiming interest i.e.01/04/1999 till the date of filing of the complaint as i.e. a part of the claim only because, the Complainant has not done that it cannot be said that the said prayer clause (b) is not part of the claim.  The Complainant as per the claim made in the relief clause has requested this Forum to grant interest on the amount of Rs.17,25,000/- from 01/04/1999 till filing of the complaint roughly comes more than Rs.19,00,000/-.  If the said amount of interest is taken into consideration alongwith the claim of Rs.17,25,000/- + the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- claimed by way of compensation and cost of Rs.30,000/- it comes to Rs.37,78,000/- till filing of the complaint which is barred by pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum. Recently the Hon’ble State Commission Maharashtra in the case of OK Marine V/s. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. in Consumer Complaint No.33/2006 decided on 08/07/2014 upon considering the decision of the Hon’ble National Commission in the case of M/s. Omaxe Ltd. V/s. 1. Ms. Iqbal Begum & Ors. In First Appeal No. 2013/887, decided on 16/05/2014 by clubbing the total amount claimed by the Complainant held that the claim exceeds of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the State Commission of more than Rs.1 Crore and therefore the State Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and complaint was maintainable only before the National Commission under Sec.21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The Hon’ble State Commission also in the aforesaid complaint (Cited Supra) held that the Hon’ble Sate Commission has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the complaint and further held that consequently other points do not survive for consideration.  In the present complaint  we also find that without going into other controversy raised by the parties to this complaint the present complaint deserves to be returned to the Complainant for filing before the Hon’ble State Commission Maharashtra, Mumbai,  accordingly we pass the following order –

O R D E R

                      i.       For want of pecuniary jurisdiction the Complaint No.233/2005 be returned to the Complainant for filing before the Hon’ble

                               State Commission Maharashtra, Mumbai.

              ii.      There is no order as to cost.   

             iii.      Certified copies of this order be furnished to the parties.