State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Magma Fincorp Ltd. vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others on 7 December, 2018
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 Complaint Case No. CC/814/2018 ( Date of Filing : 15 Nov 2018 ) 1. Magma Fincorp Ltd. office at 24, Park Street, P.S. - Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700 016. ...........Complainant(s) Versus 1. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others Regd. office at Oriental House, P.B. no. 7037, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi - 110 007. 2. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Br. office at 4 Lyons Range, 2nd Floor, P.S. - Hare Street, Kolkata - 700 001. 3. Magma Housing Finance Ltd. 24, Park Street, P.S. - Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700 016. 4. Magma HDI General Insurance Co. Ltd. 24, Park Street, P.S. - Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700 016. 5. MF Process & Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 24, Park Street, P.S. - Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700 016. ............Opp.Party(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA MEMBER For the Complainant: Ms. Soni Ojha,Ms. Punam Choubhay,Ms. Dipanjana Paul, Advocate For the Opp. Party: Dated : 07 Dec 2018 Final Order / Judgement Order No. 2 date: 07-12-2018 Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member
Record is put up today for passing order in respect of the maintainability of the case.
Having heard the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant and on perusal of the material on record, it transpires that the subject insurance policy was taken for a sum insured of Rs. 30,00,00,00,000/- + Rs. 1,60,00,00,000/-, as against the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission to the tune of Rs. 1,00,00,000/-.
Notwithstanding, it is argued by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant that value of claim should be the determining factor for fixing the pecuniary jurisdiction of State Commission, we cannot appreciate such conviction on due consideration of the provision laid down u/s 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Relevant partition of the above Section is appended below for better illustration.
".... State Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed exceeds rupees twenty lakh but does not exceed rupees one crore...."
It is quite clear from the above that the aggregate value of service and compensation has to be taken into consideration for determining the pecuniary jurisdiction of District Forum/State Commission/National Commission, as the case may be. The above provision nowhere stipulates that the value of claim should weigh above all other considerations.
Since an Insuree hires the services of the Insurer by indemnifying its products to the extent of sum insured of the subject policy, there can be no two opinions as to the fact that in case of insurance related disputes, the sum insured of insurance policy happens to be the value of service.
In such premises, we are afraid, the instant complaint case is not maintainable in this Commission. The same is dismissed as such. Complainant is, however, given due liberty to approach the competent Court of Law to agitate its grievance in accordance with law. [HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA] MEMBER