A District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in the Capital on Monday dismissed a complaint citing limitations on the grounds of territorial jurisdiction.
The complainant, Prem Joshi, had alleged deficiency in services on the part of Jurasik Park Inn, where he had checked in with his family. He had alleged that the opposite parties, including the in-house food court and Bisleri International, had colluded to “unfair trade practices”.
However, the District Forum, North, observed that none of the opposite parties ‘reside or carry on business within the territory jurisdiction of this court’.
Referring to previous judgments, the counsel for the complainant argued that the “city of Delhi has been divided into several districts for the sake of administrative convenience and not for the sake of territorial jurisdiction”. It was further argued that this reflected the fact that “since Delhi happens to be one district, every forum has jurisdiction over every case”.
Specific provision
However, the court cited relevant sections of the Consumer Protection Act which stated that the state government could make changes to the provisions. Citing an order received by the court in 1999, from the then Lieutenant-Governor, the court said that the L-G had notified specific provision for allocation of business among the various district forums.
In the order, the court observed: “According to the notification, the District Forum – North is competent to exercise jurisdiction only over cases in which jurisdiction to entertain cases falls in areas coming under police stations falling in the north district.”
