Delhi District Forum (West), Janakpuri should have territorial jurisdiction the contract having concluded in Delhi and part-performed where you reside. The decision in Spicejet Ltd. v. Ranju Aery is an elegantly delivered opinion on this issue. There are other decisions also but I prefer the reasoning adopted in the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Ranju Aery.
--------------------------------------------
Spicejet Ltd. v. Ranju Aery
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/53351355/
In the instant case, the complainant/appellant and her family members, purchased air tickets online, through internet from Chandigarh, for a holiday to Bagdogra.
...
amount was paid through debit card. Money was transferred from a bank account of the respondent, situated in Chandigarh, to the bank account of the appellant, at Gurgaon, where headquarter of the appellant is situated. The said tickets which were purchased through internet, were delivered to the respondent, at Chandigarh.
...
it was argued by Counsel for the appellant that only the Consumer Forum at Gurgaon, has territorial jurisdiction, to entertain and decide the complaint.
...
In the present times, the availability of goods and services, through the website at a particular place, has virtually become the same thing, as a seller having shops, in that place, in the physical sense. Besides as above, ordinarily existence of offer and its intimation, results in a contract and a suit can be filed at a place, where acceptance was communicated. Further more performance of a contract forms a part of cause of action and grievance can be redressed by filing a suit, qua its breach at a place, where contract should have been performed. It was so said by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in A.B.C. Laminart Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. A.P. Agencies, Salem, 1989 AIR 1239=1989 SCR (2) 1, while interpreting the provisions of Section 20 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
...
For the purpose of this discussion, Section 13 (3) of the I.T. Act, 2000, reads thus:-
"Save as otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee, an electronic record is deemed to be dispatched at the place where the originator has his place of business, and is deemed to be received at the place where the addressee has his place of business."
...
In the present case, offer was made to purchase air tickets through internet. It was accepted and tickets, through internet, were sent on payment of money, to the complainant, at Chandigarh. In terms of above provisions, it can safely be said that the air tickets would be taken to have been sent at complainant's place of business/residence. The acceptance of contract would also be deemed to have been communicated at the above place.
...
we can safely hold that, where contracts for services and/or goods are entered into over the internet (or online as such transactions are commonly referred to), then, for the purposes of consumer complaints, part of the cause of action arises interalia, at the complainant's place of business, if acceptance of the contract is communicated to her through the internet, including the medium of email.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Air Deccan v. Ram Gopal Agarwal
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Meghalaya
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/130317199/
Vinod Kumar vs Shoeb Merchant & Ebay India (P) Ltd. (Kerala SCDRC Appeal No. 409/2006) This case too was one of online purchase and the learned State Commission, Kerala allowed the claim of the Complainant filed within its territorial jurisdiction where the Complainant resided and placed his order for a mobile set through the Opposite Partys website.
![Dr. Atul [9013898936]](/img/avatars/my_avatars/118016.jpg)
