ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. Counsel for the parties are heard. 3. The complaint on the date on which it was filed before the National Commission was within its pecuniary jurisdiction. It is only as a result of amendment to the Act that the pecuniary jurisdiction below one crore is now in the State Commission. The appellant as complainant made a request for transfer of the case to the State Commission. The request has been rejected by the impugned order of the National Commission which relied on its earlier order dated 26-3-2003 passed in another case being Original Petition No. 286 of 2000 before it of which copy is filed as Annexure P-2 with the special leave petition. In the order in the said case, the amendment of the section making change in the pecuniary jurisdiction of the National Commission and the State Commission was held to be prospective. The order in the said case states that detailed reasons for taking such a view of prospective operation of the Amendment Act would be recorded subsequently. 4. The counsel for the parties report that they are not aware of any separate order passed by the National Commission recording its detailed reasons for holding that the Amendment Act introducing change in the pecuniary jurisdiction of the National State Commission is prospective. 5. For the reasons aforesaid, we allow this appeal, set aside the impugned order dated 14-8-2003 and remand the matter to the National Commission to take a fresh decision on its pecuniary jurisdiction in the matter of complaint filed by the appellant before it. It shall now record detailed reasons for the a view which it would take on the issue of pecuniary jurisdiction raised before it. 6. The appeal is allowed with the above directions.