The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 11 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to determine the jurisdiction of the District Forum based on the cause of action.

Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Garg, President—This appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1986”) has been filed by the appellant-complainant against the order dated 2.12.2004 passed by the learned District Forum, Jhunjhunu in Case No. 563/03 by which the complaint filed by the complainant-appellant under Section 12 of the Act of 1986 was dismissed on the ground of jurisdiction.

2. It may be stated here that the complainant-appellant filed a complaint before the learned District Forum, Jhunjhunu on 18.11.2003 stating inter alia that he was registered owner of vehicle Indica car bearing No. DL-3CU/5312 and that vehicle was got insured by him with the respondents through Policy No. 00065706000100 for the period from 31.1.2003 to 30.1.2004. It was further stated in the complaint that on 4.7.2003, the vehicle in question had met with accident near Chirawa-Jhunjhunu Road, as a result of which, the vehicle in question was damaged and for that accident, FIR No. 163/03 was lodged in the Police Station Sadar, Jhunjhunu and information about the said accident was also given to the respondents and upon this, the Surveyor was appointed by the respondents. The complainant-appellant preferred claim for the damages caused to the vehicle in question before the respondents, but the same was not settled nor any payment was made by the respondents to the complainant-appellant. Hence, the present complaint was filed.

3. A reply was filed by the respondents and their case was that the vehicle in question was being used by the complainant-appellant in violation of the terms and conditions of the policy in question and, therefore, the claim of the complainant-appellant was repudiated and he was informed through letter dated 25.11.2003 and in doing so, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the respondents and thus, the present complaint deserves to be dismissed. Apart from this, no cause of action has arisen at Jhunjhunu, therefore, Jhunjhunu District Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint and the same deserves to be dismissed as such.

4. After hearing both the parties, the learned District Forum, Jhunjhunu through order dated 2.12.2004 dismissed the complaint of the complainant-appellant on ground of jurisdiction holding inter alia:

(i) That the owner of the vehicle in question is Hemant Gupta, who is resident of Delhi and this complaint has been filed by power of attorney-holder, who is said to be resident of Chirawa.

(ii) That the cover note of the policy clearly reveals the fact that it was executed in Gurgaon (Haryana).

(iii) That there is no branch office of the respondents at Jhunjhunu and thus, no cause of action has arisen in Jhunjhunu where the accident had taken place.

(iv) That Section 11 of the Act of 1986 provides for jurisdiction of the District Forum and the present case was not covered by any of the Clauses (a), (b) & (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 11 of the Act of 1986 and the present claim has not been filed under the Motor Vehicles Act and since the complainant as well as respondents both do not hail from Jhunjhunu nor their business was situated in Jhunjhunu nor any part of the insurance contract has been executed at Jhunjhunu, therefore, in these circumstances, Jhunjhunu District Forum has no jurisdiction.

5. Aggrieved from the said order dated 2.12.2004 passed by the learned District Forum, Jhunjhunu, this appeal has been filed by the appellant-complainant.

6. In this appeal, the main contentions of the learned Counsel for the appellant are:

(i) That the learned District Forum has committed mistake in deciding the issue of territorial jurisdiction, as the respondents have failed to take such plea at the earliest possible stage.

(ii) That so far as the accruing of cause of action at Jhunjhunu is concerned, since accident had taken place at Jhunjhunu, therefore, as per Clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 11 of the Act of 198