NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/941/2012

IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

DHARMENDRA KUMAR VERMA - Opp.Party(s)

MS. SHANTHA DEVI RAMAN

03 Aug 2012

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 941 OF 2012
 
(Against the Order dated 02/11/2011 in Appeal No. 321/2011 of the State Commission Chhattisgarh)
1. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
FAI Building, 10 Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg,Autab Industrial Area
New Delhi - 110067
Delhi
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. DHARMENDRA KUMAR VERMA
R/o Village Sonaikala,Post Chikhli, Tehsil Saja,
Durg
C.G
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN, PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. VINEETA RAI, MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Ms. Anjalli Bansall, Advocate for
Mrs. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate
For the Respondent :
Mr. Mohd. Anis Ur Rehman, Advocate for
Mr. R. K. Bhawnani, Advocate

Dated : 03 Aug 2012
ORDER

State Commission has dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.  There was a delay of 33 days in filing the appeal.  Subject

-2-

to payment of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent by way of costs, limited notice for today was issued to the respondent to show cause as to why the delay in filing the appeal before the State Commission be not condoned and the case remitted back to the State Commission to decide it afresh in accordance with law.  Rs.7,000/- were directed to be paid to the respondent towards litigation and other allied expenses.

          Mr. Anis Ur Rehman, Advocate for Mr. R. K. Bhawnani, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent and states that as per his information neither the costs nor the litigation expenses have been paid to the respondent.

          Limited notice issued to the respondent is made absolute.  In the interest of justice, delay of 33 days in filing the appeal before the State Commission is condoned.  Order of the State Commission is set aside and the case remitted back to the State Commission to decide it afresh in accordance with law.

          Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the State Commission on 26.09.2012.

 

-3-

          Petitioner is directed to pay the sum of Rs.10,000/- towards costs and Rs.7,000/- towards litigation expenses to the respondent on the date of appearance before the State Commission.  Order is conditional subject to payment of Rs.17,000/- to the respondent.  In case this amount is not paid to the respondent on the first date of appearance before the State Commission, the revision petition would be deemed to be dismissed. 

 
......................J
ASHOK BHAN
PRESIDENT
......................
VINEETA RAI
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.