The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has recently upheld in a judgment [M/s. Pyaridevi Chabiraj Steels Pvt. Ltd Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors., C.C. No. 833/2020] which was passed in the light of amended Consumer Protection Act 2019 that the pecuniary jurisdiction of a competent consumer commission is to be determined by the value of good or serviced “paid” as consideration and not by the value of goods or services “purchased”.
Determination of Pecuniary Jurisdiction under the Consumer Protection Act 1986
Under section 21(a)(i) of the old Consumer Protection Act, pecuniary jurisdiction was to be determined by taking the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed. Meaning thereby that the value of the goods or services as also the compensation is to be added to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the National Commission has the pecuniary jurisdiction or not. This law was laid down by a three Member Bench of this Commission in Ambrish Kumar Shukla & 21 Ors. Vs. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, I (2017) CPJ I (NC). Thus in the Old Consumer Protection Act, it was “the value of the goods or services and the compensation claimed” taken into consideration while determining the pecuniary jurisdiction.
Section 21 of the old Consumer Protection Act defined the Pecuniary Jurisdiction of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and stated the following:
21. Jurisdiction of the National Commission—Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the National Commission shall have jurisdiction—
(a) to entertain—
(i) complaints where the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed exceeds 3 [rupees one crore]; and
(ii) appeals against the orders of any State Commission; and
Position after the enactment of new Consumer Protection Act 2019
After the enactment of the new Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which came in to force on 24th July 2020, the parameter for the determination of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has been completely changed. The section 34 (1), 47(1)(a) and 58 (1)(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 shall now determine the pecuniary jurisdiction of District Commission, State Commission and National Commission. Before to move ahead, analysis and compare the new provisions for determining the pecuniary jurisdictions of the competent commission, let’s have a view of section 34 (1), 47(1)(a) and 58 (1)(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act 2019
Section 34 (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed one crore rupees.
Section 47 (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the State Commission shall have jurisdiction—
(a) to entertain—
(i) complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration, exceeds rupees one crore but does not exceed rupees ten crores.
Section 58 (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the National Commission shall have jurisdiction—
(a) to entertain—
(i) complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration exceeds rupees ten crores.
In the present case, a preliminary point arises as to how this Consumer Complaint is maintainable before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission because the value of the consideration paid in the present case i.e. premium paid for taking the Insurance Policies was only Rs 3,20,525 and Rs 1,23,037 the total of which comes to Rs 4,43,562 (Rupees Four Lac forty-three thousand five hundred and sixty-two only), which is less than the consideration paid of more than Rs 10,00,00,000 (Rupees Ten crores) as provided under Section 58 (1) (a) (i) of the Act of 2019.
Conclusion
After the enactment of new Consumer Protection Act, 2019 criteria for deciding the pecuniary jurisdiction of the appropriate Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has changed from the value of the goods or services plus compensation to the value of the consideration paid by the consumer.
This article offers a fascinating perspective on the subject. The depth of research and clarity in presentation make it a valuable read for anyone interested in this topic. It’s refreshing to see such well-articulated insights that not only inform but also provoke thoughtful discussion. I particularly appreciated the way the author connected various aspects to provide a comprehensive understanding. It’s clear that a lot of effort went into compiling this piece, and it certainly pays off. Looking forward to reading more from this author and hearing other readers’ thoughts. Keep up the excellent work!
Fantastic article! I appreciate how clearly you explained the topic. Your insights are both informative and thought-provoking. I’m curious about your thoughts on the future implications of this. How do you see this evolving over time? Looking forward to more discussions and perspectives from others. Thanks for sharing!
Great article! I found your perspective on this topic both enlightening and thought-provoking. The way you break down complex ideas into understandable insights is truly commendable. It’s interesting to see how these developments could shape our future. I’m particularly intrigued by your point about potential challenges and would love to dive deeper into that.
For those who are interested in exploring this topic further, I recommend checking out this resource for more detailed information: comprehensive guide. It offers additional insights that complement what’s discussed here.
Looking forward to hearing others’ thoughts and continuing this discussion. Thanks for sharing such valuable information!