38.6c New Delhi, India, Wednesday, December 24, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Value of Goods and Services Paid as consideration Determine Pecuniary Jurisdiction [READ ORDER]

By Lakshya Tewari      07 September, 2020 07:47 PM      0 Comments
Value of Goods and Services Paid as consideration Determine Pecuniary Jurisdiction [READ ORDER]

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) held in a order that the pecuniary jurisdiction of Consumers for a is to be determined by the value of goods/services paid as consideration without including the value of goods/services purchased. 

The consumer complaint was filed by a Kolkata based factory against its insurer, National Insurance Company Ltd. The case was of M/S. Pyaridevi Chabirajn Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. The complaint was that the applicant had wrongly repudiated their insurance claim worth, Rs.28,00,20,000/- which was purchased by the company by paying a premium of Rs.4,43,562/-. 

The commission opined that the value of the consideration paid in the present case was less than Rs.10,00,00,000/- (pecuniary jurisdiction of NDCRC, as per Section 58(1)(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which states that:- complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration exceeds rupees ten crores, it had to be determined whether the complaint shall be maintainable before it.

The court observed that since this case is governed under Consumer Protection Act, 1986, NCDRC has the jurisdiction over the matter as the pecuniary jurisdiction in the matter where the Act of 1986 is applied is determined by value of the goods or services and compensation, it means that the value of goods or services and also the compensation would be added to reach a conclusion as to whether the National Commission has the jurisdiction or not. Section 21(a)(i) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, under this the National Commission have the jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the goods or services and compensation claimed exceeded Rs.1,00,00,000/-, whereas, under the new law, the National Commission has jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of goods or services paid as consideration exceeds Rs.10,00,00,000/-. 

The change was done so that the consumer can reach the appropriate Consumer Fora. In the Act of 1986 if a person agrees to purchase anything for Rs.60,00,000/- and later he approached the Consumer Forum seeking a refund along with compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- then the value will exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- and the Consumer Complaint was filed before the National Commission. 

The order was passed by the bench of Justice RK Agrawal (President) and Dr, SM Kantikar (Member), the bench said:-

It appears that the Parliament while enacting the Act 0f 2019 was conscious of this fact and to ensure that Consumer should approach the appropriate Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission whether it is District, State or National only the value of the consideration while determining the pecuniary jurisdiction and not the value of goods or services and compensation, and that is why a specific provision has been made in Section34(1), 47(1)(a)(i) and 58(1)(a)(i) providing for the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, State Consumer Disputed Redressal Commission, and National Commission respectively.

 

[READ ORDER]



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

sheikh-hasina-blames-yunus-led-interim-government-for-deteriorating-india-bangladesh-relations
Trending International
Sheikh Hasina Blames Yunus-Led Interim Government for Deteriorating India-Bangladesh Relations

Sheikh Hasina blames the Yunus-led interim government for straining India-Bangladesh ties, citing hostile rhetoric and failure to protect minorities.

23 December, 2025 12:08 AM

TOP STORIES

sc-quashes-fir-against-r-ashoka-in-land-allotment-case
Trending Judiciary
SC Quashes FIR Against R. Ashoka in Land Allotment Case [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court quashes ACB FIR against Karnataka MLA R Ashoka in land allotment case, citing lack of sanction, malice and political vendetta.

18 December, 2025 07:58 PM
delhi-hc-appoints-sole-arbitrator-in-meghalaya-hotels-irctc-dispute-reiterates-bar-on-psu-curated-arbitration-panels
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Appoints Sole Arbitrator in Meghalaya Hotels–IRCTC Dispute; Reiterates Bar on PSU-Curated Arbitration Panels [Read Order]

Delhi High Court appoints sole arbitrator in Meghalaya Hotels–IRCTC dispute, reiterating Supreme Court’s bar on PSU-curated arbitration panels.

18 December, 2025 08:23 PM
fight-4-justice-awards-2025-live4freedom-and-dhcba-to-honour-landmark-legal-struggles
Trending Events & Opportunity
Fight 4 Justice Awards 2025: Live4Freedom and DHCBA to Honour Landmark Legal Struggles

Fight 4 Justice Awards 2025 on Dec 20: Justice N. Kotiswar Singh as Chief Guest; Live4Freedom and DHCBA honour landmark legal struggles.

20 December, 2025 04:30 PM
madras-hc-calls-for-audit-of-fees-paid-to-law-officers-criticises-exorbitant-payments-and-unnecessary-appearances-by-additional-advocate-generals
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Calls for Audit of Fees Paid to Law Officers; Criticises Exorbitant Payments and Unnecessary Appearances by Additional Advocate Generals [Read Order]

Madras High Court calls for audit of fees paid to law officers, flags exorbitant payments and unnecessary appearances by Additional Advocate Generals.

22 December, 2025 08:56 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email