We have heard Mr. Ashok Walia, authorised representative of the complainant on the question of maintainability of the present complaint before this Commission and have carefully perused the averments and allegations made in the complaint and the material produced alongwith the complaint. Complainant has filed the complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party university in not issuing the mark-sheet of the complainant for a period of about 11 months after the result was declared. The complainant has filed this complaint claiming compensation under following heads:- A) Security amount Rs.1000/- with interest which is deposited with respondent no. 2 as a security course of M.Sc. (F&N.) (B) Rs.1,79,235.00 complainant salary loss till today. (C) Rs.50,00,000/- for complainant harassment, breach of mental peace from long time. (D) Rs.20,00,000/- academic loss, loss of social dignity among Society & future loss of career. (E) Rs.30,00,000/- for breach of mental peace & harassment of complainant parents (specially for mother). (F) Rs.20,000/- for expenses incurred in this complaint & earlier letters. (G) This Honle Commission may also be pleased to pass order against the respondent no. 1 that he were to furnish degree of B.Sc. (home science) & M.Sc. (F.&N.). (H) Any other order which deems fit to this Honle Commission may also be passed in favour of complainant. The complainant shall be highly obliged for this impartial justice & teaching the lesson for future so that their negligent system may be rectified in future. 2. Assuming for the sake of argument that the complainant would be able to establish some deficiency on the part of the opposite party University when the complaint is put to trial, still we are of the considered opinion that the present complaint does not lie within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission as prima facie the claim made in the complaint, to say the least, is inflated, exaggerated and beyond proportion to the loss and / or injury which may have been suffered by the complainant on account of alleged deficiency in service. It by no stretch can exceed Rupees one crore. 3. The authorised representative made a candid statement before us that he has filed this complaint before this Commission as he apprehends that it will take long period of about five to seven years before any other consumer fora if the complaint is filed before the said fora. We must dispel this apprehension of the complainant because the Consumer Fora established under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are expected to dispose of the consumer complaints as expeditiously as it may be practicable within a prescribed time frame. 4. We, therefore, direct the Registry to return the complaint to the complainant for filing fresh complaint after modifying the valuation of the complaint before a competent consumer fora having jurisdiction in the matter. Time taken in these proceedings shall be excluded for the purpose of computation of limitation. The complaint is dismissed accordingly.