For the complainant:- Sri S.K.Sahu, Advocate,Bhawanipatna.
For the O.P. No.1:- Sri S.K.Mund, Advocate,Bhawanipatna
For the O.P.No.2: - Sri S.K.Panda, Advocate,Bhawanipatna.
ORDER.
The present dispute arises out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service against the afore said O.Ps for non payment of an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards personal accidental insurance facility for Savings Bank accounts holder.
On being noticed the O.P. No.1 appeared through their learned counsel, filed written version and defended the case.
On being noticed the O.P. No.2 appeared through their learned counsel and filed memo to the effect that the claim of the complainant will be finalized after disposal of the present case and produced letter of the O.P. No.2 addressed in favour of the Advocate for the O.P. No. 2. In the letter the O.P. mentioned that the claim is maintainable and they will release the claim after finalization of consumer case on the event of the complainant submitting a duly signed discharge voucher for the settled amount.
The learned counsel for the complainant also filed a memo stating that as the O.P. No.2 had agreed to settle the claim as the same being maintainable on the condition of none proceeding of this consumer case and believing the memo of the O.P. No.2 the complainant is not proceeding further.
Perused the Memos filed by the learned counsel for the O.P. No.2, and the learned counsel for the complainant . Memos are allowed.
Hence to meet the ends of justice, the following order is passed. ORDER.
In view of the above discussion the case is accordingly disposed of with the observation that in case the O.P. No.2 will not settle the claim the complainant is at liberty to take further proceedings under C.P. act.
Dictated and corrected by me
Pronounced on this 22nd Day of March, 2017.
Member. President
