Disposed

M/S Ajmer Foods Products Pvt. Ltd. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Delhi HC27 Aug 2024CM(M)/3230/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought to withdraw a writ petition under Article 226, citing a Supreme Court judgment re-itinerating jurisdiction. The court disposed of the petition as withdrawn without expressing any opinion on the merits of the underlying consumer dispute.

What did the court decide?

Petition withdrawn with liberty to approach the jurisdictional High Court.

M/S Ajmer Foods Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Oriental… — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~85

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of decision^: 27^th August, 2024

¶4

- CM(M) 3230/2024 & CM APPL. 48764-48765/2024

¶5

M/S AJMER FOODS PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. M L Lahoty with Mr. Paban Kumar Sharma, Mr. Anchit Sripat and Mr. Pranab Kuma Nayak, Advocates.

¶7

versus

¶8

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD & ANR.

¶9

.....Respondent

¶10

Through: None.

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

¶12

J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶13

The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 02.04.2024 passed by Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short ‘NCDRC’) in First Appeal No.974/2019.

¶14

Said Appeal was filed before NCDRC impugning order dated 25.03.2019 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jaipur, Rajasthan in Complaint No.CC 36/2012.

¶15

Since the entire cause of action pertaining to the present subject matter has arisen within the jurisdiction of Rajasthan, relying upon judgment dated 04.03.2024 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Siddhartha S Mookerjee vs. Madhab Chand Mitter , Civil Appeal Nos. 3915-16/2024, learned counsel for petitioner prays that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

CM(M) 3230/2024

¶18

¶19

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 8.08.2024 13:24:18

¶20

with liberty to approach the jurisdictional High Court.

¶21

This Court has gone through said order wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has, very categorically, observed that merely because NCDRC had allowed petition, the jurisdiction would not vest with Delhi High Court and observing that since the cause of action had arisen in Kolkata and the matter had been dealt with by the State Commission of West Bengal, it was held that the jurisdiction of High Court of Calcutta should have been invoked.

¶22

The situation is precisely the same here, too.

¶23

The petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. Liberty, as prayed for, is granted.

¶24

It is, however, made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion, whatsoever, over the merits of the case.

¶25

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶26

AUGUST 27, 2024 st

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed CM(M) 3230/2024 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 8.08.2024 13:24:18

¶29

M/S Ajmer Foods Products Pvt. Ltd. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Ajmer Foods Products Pvt. Ltd. v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neel Kamal Madan Vs Shyam Sunder Suri & Anr.

Sh. Arun Navariya Vs Sh. Naresh & Ors.

Veer Singh through Power of Attorney Vs Kinri Dhir

Asha Rani Sukhija Vs Pankaj Sikri

Praveen Kumar Vs Jyoti

Mohd Hanif Vs Jaideep Chaudhary

Lalit Kumar Vs Shri Ved Pal & Ors.

Galgotias University Vs Icon Facilitators Private Limited

Neel Kamal Madan Vs Shyam Sunder Suri & Anr.

Sh. Arun Navariya Vs Sh. Naresh & Ors.

Veer Singh through Power of Attorney Vs Kinri Dhir

Swami Chakrapani Ji Maharaj National President, Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha Vs Election Commission of India & Ors.

Cameo Overseas Vs the Global - v Immigration & Ors.

Arun Kumar Deshwal Vs Kapoor Plastic Works