CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI



FIRST APPEAL NO.1371 OF 2008 Date of filing : 26/12/2007

IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.111/2007 Date of order : 06/05/2009

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, SATARA

@ MISC.APPLICATION NO.1928/2008



1. Mr.Pratap K.Shah

2. Mrs.Ranjana P.Shah

Both R/o.117, Tilak Road

A/P & Tal.Malegaon, Dist.Nasik ………..Appellants/org.complainants

v/s.

1. Cox & Kings Pvt.Ltd.

Krishna Chambers

Office no.1, first floor

Galaxi Garden, North Main Road

Koregaon park, Pune 411 001

2. Kashish Holidays

shop no.24, Poornima towers

397 Shankar Sheth Road

Pune 411 037 ………Respondents/org.O.Ps



Corum: Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

Smt.S.P.Lale, Hon’ble Member



Present : Mr.N.H.Lahoti-Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.Mohit Bhansali-Advocate h/f.Mr.S.B.Prabhawalkar-Advocate

for the respondent

O R A L O R D E R

Per Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member

This appeal raise out of order/award dated 18/7/2008 passed in consumer complaint no.14/2008 Pratap K. Shah and another V/s. Cox & Kings Pvt.Ltd. and another by District Consumer Forum, Nasik (‘Forum below’ in short). Respondents/org. complainants have grievance that when they had taken a tour of appellants/respondents, they were not provided with Jain food and connected facilities and, therefore, they claimed compensation for deficiency in service. Said complaint stood dismissed on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. However, while dismissing the complaint, Rs.5000/- were also awarded as cost to the respondent. Feeling aggrieved thereby, this appeal is preferred by the original complainants.

Heard Mr.N.H.Lahoti-Advocate for the appellants. Mr.Mohit Bhansali-Advocate h/f.Mr.S.B.Prabhawalkar-Advocate for the respondents.

Respondents/org.O.P. admittedly are having their office at Pune. They too have office at Mumbai and as per the Agreement between the parties, jurisdiction for dispute is selected at Bombay. Accordingly the appellants, since they have booked the tour from Malegaon, part of cause of action arose at Malegaon and therefore District Consumer Forum, Nasik has jurisdiction. We do not agree with the appellants on this count, simply because mere remittance of money from Malegaon would not constitute part of cause of action at Malegaon. Therefore, finding of the Forum below on that count cannot be sustained.

However, we find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the appellants about course of action taken by the Forum below as reflected in the final order. It was desirable, if the Forum below had chosen to return the complaint, once it found that it had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Further, Rs.5000/- were awarded as costs, but there is nothing in the impugned order to show as to why such exemplary costs were awarded. Therefore, even that order cannot be supported. We hold accordingly and pass following order:-

ORDER

1. Misc.application no.1928/2008 for condonation of delay is allowed.

2. Appeal is partly allowed.

3. Impugned order is set aside.

4. Forum below is directed to return the complaint on the ground of want of territorial jurisdiction.

5. In the given circumstances, no order as to costs.

6. Amount deposited by the appellant be returned to the appellant.





(S.P.Lale) (S.R.Khanzode)

Member Presiding Judicial Member