Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

RP/22/60

SMT.NEETA DEVI - Complainant(s)

Versus

GANPATI COLD STORAGE - Opp.Party(s)

SH.H.SHARMA

06 Sep 2022

ORDER

M. P. STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,                         

                             PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL                                        

REVISION PETITION NO. 58 OF 2022

(Arising out of order dated 09.11.2021 passed in C.C.No. 85/2019 by District Commission, Gwalior)

SMT. REKHA DEVI,

W/O SHRI MOHANLAL                                                                       ...        PETITIONER

                      Versus

GANPATI COLD STORAGE &

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.                                                    …       RESPONDENTS     

                     

REVISION PETITION NO. 59 OF 2022

(Arising out of order dated 09.11.2021 passed in C.C.No. 86/2019 by District Commission, Gwalior)

GOVIND AGRAWAL                                                                            ...        PETITIONER

                      Versus

GANPATI COLD STORAGE &

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.                                                    …       RESPONDENTS

                   

REVISION PETITION NO. 60 OF 2022

(Arising out of order dated 09.11.2021 passed in C.C.No. 353/2019 by District Commission, Gwalior)

SMT. NEETA DEVI                                                                              …      PETITIONER

                      Versus

GANPATI COLD STORAGE &

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.                                                    …       RESPONDENTS

 

REVISION PETITION NO. 61 OF 2022

(Arising out of order dated 09.11.2021 passed in C.C.No. 666/2020 by District Commission, Gwalior)

M/S CHOURASIA KHADYA BHANDAR                                              ...        PETITIONER

                      Versus

GANPATI COLD STORAGE &

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.                                                    …       RESPONDENTS

 

BEFORE :

 

            HON’BLE SHRI A. K. TIWARI                  :     PRESIDING MEMBER

            HON’BLE DR. SRIKANT PANDEY          :      MEMBER          

            HON’BLE SHRI D. K. SHRIVASTAVA     :      MEMBER

         

COUNSEL FOR PARTIES :

 

                Shri Hemant Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.

           Shri Ravindra Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.

           Ms. Preetima Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

 

 

                                                        

-2-

O R D E R

(Passed On 06.09.2022)

                   The following order of the Commission was delivered by A. K. Tiwari, Presiding Member:           

                   Aforesaid 4 revision petitions are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order as common point involved in the matter.  This order shall govern disposal of all the aforesaid revision petitions. For convenience facts of the case are taken from the Revision Petition No. 58/2022 unless otherwise stated.

2.                This revision petition arises out of the order dated 09.11.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gwalior (for short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.85/2019, whereby an interim application filed by the petitioner seeking interim relief was dismissed.

3.                Facts of the case in short as stated by the petitioner are the petitioner stored her goods in the cold storage of opposite party no.1.  The opposite party no.1 took two insurance policies from the opposite party no.2-insurance company, one for the purposes of hold and trust and another for burglary, for the goods kept in its cold storage. The goods kept by the complainant with the opposite party no.1-cold storage damaged on 25.12.2008 due to fire broke out in cold storage. On claim being made to the insurance company, the insurance company appointed the surveyor and on the basis of surveyor’s report, the opposite party no.1 received the

 

-3-

amount from the opposite party no.2 insurance company. When the complainant did not receive the amount of compensation, she approached the District Commission by filing a complaint.  In the complaint case before the District Commission, by an interim application she made a prayer that the opposite party no.2 insurance company be directed to file survey report. Another prayer was made that the opposite party no.2-insurance company be also directed to file the copy of the proposal form and information be given regarding the officer’s name and post, who processed the same.

4.                The District Commission by the impugned order allowed the prayer for filing the survey report but rejected the prayer regarding information of the officer concerned, who processed the claim.

5.                Against the impugned order, the petitioner approached this Commission in the present revision.

6.                On going through the revision petition and the impugned order, we find that the revision petition against the order dated 09.11.2021 is filed on 30.06.2022 i.e. after delay of three months and twenty seven days. On going through the IA-1 application for condonation of delay, from the grounds shown for delay, we do not find any sufficient cause for condoning the delay of three months and twenty seven days.

 

-4-

7.                Accordingly, the Revision Petitions are dismissed as barred by limitation. No order as to costs. This order be placed in Revision Petition No. 58/2022 and a copy be placed in Revision Petition Nos. 59, 60 and 61 of 2022.     

      (A. K. Tiwari)       (Dr. Srikant Pandey)    (D. K. Shrivastava)

Presiding Member             Member                       Member