STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW
APPEAL NO. 184 OF 2017
(Against judgment and order dated 15-10-2016 in Complaint
Case No.90 of 2014 of the District Consumer Forum-I, Bareilly)
- Manager,
M/s Max Bupa Health Insurane Co. Ltd.
Branch Office at K-23/24
A.N.B. First Floor
Sector-18 Noida
- M/s. Max Bupa Health Insurance Co. Ltd.
Through its Chief Executive Officer
Having its Corporate Office
B1/I-2, Mohan Cooperatrive Industrial State
Mathura Road, New Delhi 110044
...Appellants
Vs.
Chandan Singh Negi
S/o Sri Kripal Singh Negi
]R/o 61 Gayatri Nagar
Near Air Force Gate, Nainital Road
P.S. Izzatnagar, Bareilly
...Respondent
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT
For the Appellant : Sri Manish Mishra, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Sri V K Rai & Sri Barjinder Singh, Advocate
Dated : 10-01-2018
JUDGMENT
MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT(ORAL)
This is an appeal filed under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against judgment and order dated 15-10-2016 passed by District Consumer Forum-I, Bareilly in Complaint Case No. 90 of 2014 Chandan Singh Negi V/s Manager, Max Bupa Insurance Company Limited and another whereby the District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint and ordered appellants/opposite parties to pay to complainant Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.15,000/- as cost of litigation within one month. The District Consumer Forum has further ordered that in case of default respondent/complainant shall be entitled to recover above amounts with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of complaint till date of payment.
:2:
Feeling aggrieved with the judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum, opposite parties of complaint have filed this appeal.
Learned Counsel Mr. Manish Mishra appeared for appellants.
Learned Counsel Mr. Vivek Kumar Rai and Sri Barjinder Singh appeared for respondent.
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties on delay condonation application.
Free certified copy of impugned judgment and order has been furnished to the appellants on 22-10-2016 whereas appeal has been filed on 25-01-2017 with 65 days delay after expiry of limitation. Appellants have moved application for condoning delay in filing appeal. In affidavit filed by appellants in support of delay condonation application it has been stated that certified copy of the impugned judgment and order was received on 26-10-2016 in the office of appellants. Thereafter it was sent to the panel advocate of the appellants for opinion regarding filing of appeal and the panel advocate of the Company gave legal opinion on 02-12-2016 to file appeal. Thereafter instructions were given to the Finance Department of the Company for getting prepared draft of statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- for filing appeal. The draft was prepared on 13-12-2016 and was handed over to Legal Department on 17-12-2016.
In affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application it has been further stated that the appellants collected other papers from District Consumer Forum and handed over papers to their learned Counsel for filing appeal. But learned Counsel for the appellants was out of station due to winter vacation and when he returned back he sent papers to appellants on 03-01-2017 for filing appeal. Thereafter the appeal was vetted by concerned department of appellants and was filed before State Commission on 25-01-2017.
The respondent has filed objection against delay condonation application.
It has been contended by learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant that the reasons stated for delay in filing appeal
:3:
are not sufficient to condone delay.
Learned Counsel for the appellants has contended that the delay has been caused due to procedural reasons. Delay has not been deliberately caused.
I have considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties.
Averment made in paragraph 4 of affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application shows that the copy of impugned judgment and order was received by the panel advocate of the Company on 26-10-2016 and the panel advocate retained it till 02-12-2016. No explanation has been given as to why the panel lawyer of the appellants has with-held his opinion for such a long time.
Averment made in para 5 of affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application shows that the draft for filing appeal was prepared on 13-12-2016. Thereafter why the records were not submitted to the learned Counsel for filing appeal before State Commission. No explanation has been given about this delay also.
Considering facts and circumstances of the case as well as averments made in affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application it appears that appellants have failed to give sufficient reasons to condone delay of appeal.
In view of above delay condonation application is rejected and appeal is dismissed as time barred.
Rs.25,000/- deposited by appellants under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 in appeal shall be remitted to District Consumer Forum alongwith interest accrued for disposal in accordance with this judgment.
Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.
( JUSTICE A H KHAN )
PRESIDENT
pnt
