Order no. 2                                                           Date : 27.02.2018.

Today i.e., 27.02.2018 is fixed for admission hearing.

Ld. advocate for the complainant is present.

Case is taken up for admission hearing.

Heard ld. advocate for complainant.

Perused the petition of complaint and materials on record.

It appears from the fact of the petition of complaint that Dipali Dey, since deceased, mother of complainant,  was admitted for her treatment in o.p. no. 1, Rabindranath Tatore International Institute of Cardiac Sciences, situated at Mukundapur, EM Bypass, Kolkata,/ Hospital, for her treatment on 15.02.2016 and she was treated by o.p. no. 2 / Doctor whose address is also situated at Mukundapur, EM Bypass, Kolkata. Thereafter Dipali Dey, mother of the complainant, died on 25.02.2016 in the o.p. no. 1 hospital. Complainant had to pay a sum of  Rs. 5,23,453/- for the treatment of  her mother Dipali Dey though there was a package to the tune of Rs. 3 lakhs for the complete  treatment of Dipali Dey, since deceased.

So this complainant has filed this complaint before this Forum situated at Howrah for compensation to the tune of Rs. 20 lakhs and for damages and harassment etc.

It also reveals that complainant further stated that cause of action of this case arose within the police station Liluah, District Howrah, which is the place of residence of Dipali Dey, since deceased. Ld. advocate for the complainant argued that as Dipali Dey, since deceased, victim, and the complainant  resided within the jurisdiction of this Forum at District Howrah. So cause of action is within the  jurisdiction of this Forum. So according to ld. advocate for complainant that this Forum has territorial jurisdiction to try this case. So we find that according to ld. advocate for the complainant that  the complainant as well as deceased victim resided within the jurisdiction of this Forum;  so cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Forum and this Forum has territorial jurisdiction  to entertain this complaint.

It is laid down in clause ( b ) of sub section (2) of Section 11 of the  C.P. Act, 1986 that a complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits and whose jurisdiction any of the o.ps., where there are more than one at the time of institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily reside or [ carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain ].

In the present case both the o.ps.  do not reside or carry on their respective business or personally works for gain within the local limits of this  Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Howrah.

We also find that deceased, Dipali Dey, died at the o.p. no. 1, hospital, which is situated beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. Bills for the treatment of deceased Dipali Dey prepared by the o.p. no. 1 Hospital and payment of said bills were also made to o.p. no. 1 / Hospital, which is situated beyond the jurisdiction of this  Forum. There is nothing in the petition of complaint to state how the cause of action arose within the territorial  jurisdiction of this Forum. Mere situation of  residence of the complainant or Dipali Dey, since deceased victim within the jurisdiction of this  Forum cannot be said that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.

So in view of the above facts and circumstances we hold that the complainant also could not be able to satisfy us primafacie that cause of action wholly or partly arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. So in view of sub section (2) of Section 11 of the C.P. Act, 1986  that this Forum has got no territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.

It has been observed by the Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2016 (2) CPR page 642 (NC) that “complaint can be dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction.”  

In view of above observation of the Hon’ble National Commission and in view of sub -section  ( 2 ) of Section 11 of the C.P. Act, 1986 we hold that the Forum has got no territorial jurisdiction  to entertain this complaint. So this complaint is liable to be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstances we like to dismiss this complaint with liberty complainant  to avail legal remedy by approaching before the appropriate Forum having territorial jurisdiction  on same cause of action according to law.

Hence,

                     O r d e r e d  

That the CC 70 of 2018 be and the same is hereby dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction.

Complainant is given liberty to take recourse for appropriate legal  remedy for redressal of his grievance by approaching before the appropriate Forum having territorial jurisdiction  on same cause of action according to law.