S.K. Naik, Member—This revision petition has been filed by the complainant before the District Forum against the order dated 17.6.2005 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Jharkhand, Ranchi (for short ‘State Commission’) vide which, order dated 11.2.2003 passed District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kodarma (for short ‘District Forum’’ holding that it had no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaint has been affirmed.

2. At the outset, it may be stated that despite repeated and due notice, the respondents failed to put up appearance and, therefore, they are being proceeded ex parte. Even the petitioner had earlier requested for the appointment of Amicus Curiae as her husband and authorized representative was not in a position to present the case properly. When the revision petition was taken up for consideration today, nobody except Mr. Vinod Kumar, learned amicus curiae has appeared before us.

3. We have heard the learned Amicus Curiae for the petitioner and also perused the available record.

4. The complainant had alleged that she had purchased 100 shares of the respondent and sent the share certificates to them for transfer in her name whic