Resources · Finder
Consumer-Forum Pecuniary Jurisdiction Finder
Which consumer commission can hear the complaint — District, State or National? Enter the value of the consideration paid for the goods or services. The money limits follow the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as revised by the 2021 Rules.
Enter the value of the consideration paid and press Find the forum. Everything is worked out in your browser; nothing is sent anywhere.
How consumer-forum pecuniary jurisdiction works
A consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is filed before one of three forums, chosen by how much the goods or services cost. This money-value test is called pecuniary jurisdiction. The three tiers are the District, the State and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions.
Under the 2019 Act the limit is judged on the value of the goods or services paid as consideration — the price actually paid — and no longer on the amount of compensation claimed, as was the position under the repealed 1986 Act (s. 34(1)).
- The bands below were revised downward by the Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission) Rules, 2021 (in force 30.12.2021). The text of the Act itself continues to refer to thresholds of one crore and ten crore; the Central Government prescribed the lower figures under the provisos to ss. 34, 47 and 58, so fifty lakh and two crore are the limits now in force.
- Territorial jurisdiction — where (which District or State) you may file — is a separate question decided under s. 34(2): usually where the opposite party resides, works or has a branch office, where the cause of action arose, or where the complainant resides or works for gain.
- These bands are for an ordinary complaint valued on the consideration paid. Complaints against unfair contracts, and appeals, follow their own provisions.
- District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Up to and including ₹50,00,000 (fifty lakh) Section 34(1), CPA 2019, read with rule 3 of the 2021 Jurisdiction Rules
- State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Above ₹50,00,000 and up to ₹2,00,00,000 (two crore) Section 47(1)(a)(i), CPA 2019, read with rule 4 of the 2021 Jurisdiction Rules
- National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Above ₹2,00,00,000 (two crore) Section 58(1)(a)(i), CPA 2019, read with rule 5 of the 2021 Jurisdiction Rules
Limits verified against the official text: the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (Act 35 of 2019), ss. 34, 47 and 58 (source: India Code, indiacode.nic.in), and the Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission) Rules, 2021, G.S.R. 912(E), Gazette of India dated 30.12.2021 (rules 3–5).
Unfair-contract complaints follow a different line
The 2021 Rules revised only the ordinary bands, under the provisos to ss. 34(1), 47(1)(a)(i) and 58(1)(a)(i). They did not touch ss. 47(1)(a)(ii) and 58(1)(a)(ii), which govern complaints against unfair contracts, and those sub-clauses carry no proviso, so the Central Government cannot vary them by rules at all. The result:
- Unfair-contract complaint where the consideration does not exceed ₹10 crore: the State Commission.
- Unfair-contract complaint above ₹10 crore: the National Commission.
- The District Commission has no unfair-contract jurisdiction at all.
The limits are the same everywhere in India
Pecuniary jurisdiction does not vary by State. The power to prescribe these values belongs to the Central Government alone (s. 101(2)(o), (x) and (zc)); the list of State rule-making powers in s. 102(2) contains no such entry; and the Supreme Court has traced the Act partly to Entry 95 of the Union List (Rutu Mihir Panchal v. Union of India, 2025 INSC 593, para 9). The filing fee is central and uniform too, prescribed by rule 7 of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions) Rules, 2020, so there is no State fee schedule either.
What genuinely differs between States is where you go, not which forum: how many District Commissions a State has established and where (s. 28(1)), whether the State Commission sits in regional benches (s. 42(2)), and the manner of depositing the appeal amount, though the fifty per cent itself is statutory and uniform (s. 41).
How the limits have changed
Useful when the cause of action is old, because the forum is judged on the law as it then stood.
| In force | District | State | National | Valued on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1986 Act, as enacted | less than ₹1 lakh | ₹1 lakh to ₹10 lakh | above ₹10 lakh | value of the goods or services and the compensation claimed |
| 18.06.1993 (Act 50 of 1993) | up to ₹5 lakh | ₹5 lakh to ₹20 lakh | above ₹20 lakh | |
| 15.03.2003 (Act 62 of 2002) | up to ₹20 lakh | ₹20 lakh to ₹1 crore | above ₹1 crore | |
| 20.07.2020 (2019 Act) | up to ₹1 crore | ₹1 crore to ₹10 crore | above ₹10 crore | value of the goods or services paid as consideration only |
| 30.12.2021 (current) | up to ₹50 lakh | ₹50 lakh to ₹2 crore | above ₹2 crore |
Two points of detail. The 1986 Act as enacted read “is less than rupees one lakh” for the District Forum while the State Commission began at “exceeds rupees one lakh”, so a claim of exactly ₹1,00,000 fell in a gap; the 1993 amendment closed it. And although Act 50 of 1993 received assent on 27.08.1993, s. 1(2) deemed it in force from 18.06.1993.
- This is a general planning aid, not legal advice, and does not create an advocate-client relationship.
- It answers only pecuniary jurisdiction — which level of commission by money value. Territorial jurisdiction, where you can actually file, is a separate question under s. 34(2).
- Some matters are valued differently — for example complaints about unfair contracts and appeals — and where no consideration was paid the position needs advice. Confirm the correct forum with an advocate before filing.
Deciding where to file a consumer complaint? You can contact the firm to discuss your matter.