Pranav Pandya Organizer vs Arvind Kumar Srivastav

THIS revision petition has been filed against the order dated 05.03.2012 passed by the Uttrakhand State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Dehradun (in short, ''the State Commission'') in Appeal No. 04/2012 - Shri Pranav Pandya Vs. Shri Arvind Kumar Srivastav by which revision was dismissed in limine.

BRIEF facts of the case are that complainant/respondent filed complaint before of District Forum and alleged that petitioner/opposite party organized a Shantikunj Kumbh in which guests and followers of Hindu religion were invited. Complainant reached there and paid Rs.251/- as admission fee. There was no security and as a result of stampede many people died and the complainant sustained injury. Hence, he claimed compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. Petitioner/OP filed reply. Petitioner moved application to dismiss the complaint on the ground of jurisdiction which was dismissed by District Forum and ordered that jurisdiction matter shall be decided along with the merits of the complaint and case was posted for evidence of the opposite party as complainant had already filed evidence. Revision petition filed against this order was dismissed by the State Commission by impugned order.

HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused record.

LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that as no fees was charged from the complainant, the complaint does not fall within the purview of consumer, hence, the District Forum had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and complaint should be dismissed.

IN para 6 of the complaint, the complainant has mentioned that he paid Rs.251 as admission fee. The complainant has already led evidence and perusal of file reveals that in pursuance to order dated 25.1.2012 passed by the District Forum, opposite party/petitioner has also filed 4 affidavits in evidence. Apparently, both the parties have led evidence and in such circumstances complaint is to be decided on merits along with the issue of jurisdiction and at this stage only issue of jurisdiction cannot be decided separately. Learned District Forum has not committed any error in ordering to decide the issue of jurisdiction along with merit and we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned State Commission in dismissing the revision petition against the order of the District Forum.

CONSEQUENTLY, the revision petition is dismissed at admission stage with no order as to cost.