
Abhimanya Singh Bika filed a consumer case on 21 Oct 2020 against M/S. GRJ Distributors & Developers Pvt . Ltd. in the New Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/87/2020 and the judgment uploaded on 02 Nov 2020.
NEW DELHI DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-VI
‘M’ BLOCK, 1STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110001
Case No.CC.87/2020 Dated:
In the matter of:
Abhimanyu Singh Bika,
S/o Mr. Arjun Singh Bika,
R/o A-94, Shiv Nagar Harnathpura,
Niwaru Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur,
Rajasthan, India.
……..COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
GRJ DISTRIBUTORS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,
Having its registered office at,
64, Scindia House, Connaught Place,
New Delhi-01.
…...........OPPOSITE PARTY
ARUN KUMAR ARYA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
File taken up through Video Conferencing.
2. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in services and claiming refund of Rs.26,71,707/- along with 18% interest besides other relief i.e. compensation and cost of litigation.
3. Argument on the admissibility of the complaint on the point of territorial jurisdiction heard. It is submitted by the complainant that registered office of OP is situated at Connaught Place, New Delhi, within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission, so this Commission is competent to adjudicate the matter.
4. In the present case, the complainant was residing at Jaipur, Rajasthan. The perusal of the file shows that the cause of action i.e. agreement was executed between the parties at No.5, 3rd Floor, City Mart, Shoha Road, Gurgaon which does not fall within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission.
5. The OP mentioned in the array of the party is having its registered office at Scindia House, Connaught Place Delhi but the complainant has failed to place on record any document which proves that any cause of action or part of it arose from the office of the OP at Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi, hence, neither the OP nor the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this District Commission.
6. We are, therefore, of the view that this Commission does not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint for want of territorial jurisdiction in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court decided on 20/10/2009 in Sonic Surgical versus National Insurance Co. Ltd Civil Appeal No. 1560 of 2004. The complaint is, therefore, directed to be returned to the complainant along with all annexure against acknowledgment. A copy of the complaint be retained for records. Complaint is accordingly, disposed off in above terms. The copy of the order be sent to complainant free of cost by post. Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to record room.
Pronounced in open Forum on 21/10/2020.
( ARUN KUMAR ARYA)
PRESIDENT
(H M VYAS)
MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.