The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission held that if a party fails to raise an objection with respect to the maintainability of the complaint on the issue of lack of territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction, the same can not be raised at the time of the appeal before the state commission.
This pronouncement was made by the Ld. National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission in M/S. TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTTD. Vs. RAJENDRA SINGH [REVISION PETITION NO. 2340 OF 2014] on 26.04.2018.
The only point for consideration before the Ld. Tribunal was whether an objection with respect to the pecuniary jurisdiction, not taken before the District Forum, could be raised at the time of filing appeal before the State Commission.
In the present case, the District Forum handled the consumer complaint which was
not within their pecuniary jurisdiction, but an objection to that effect was not taken by the opposite parties in proceedings before the District Forum.
The Hon’ble Tribunal after relying upon GTM Builders & Promoters vs. Anuja Goyal” [RP No. 2442/2013 decided on 20.04.2013] and Harshad Chiman Lal Modi Vs. DLF Universal Limited & Another (2005) 7 SCC 791, held that since in the present case, the objection with regard to pecuniary jurisdiction was not taken by the petitioner/OP at the earlier stage, they cannot be allowed to raise that objection at a subsequent stage.
It was further held that if any objection with respect to the territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction is not taken at the earliest, it cannot be allowed to be taken at a subsequent stage. Jurisdiction as to subject-matter, however, is totally distinct and stands on a different footing. Where a court has no jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the suit by reason of any limitation imposed by statute, charter or commission, it cannot take up the cause or matter. An order passed by a court having no jurisdiction is a nullity.