Karnataka

StateCommission

A/1286/2014

M/s. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Gurnath S/o. Baslingappa - Opp.Party(s)

B.C. Shivanne Gowda

21 Jan 2022

ORDER

KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE.
 
First Appeal No. A/1286/2014
( Date of Filing : 13 Oct 2014 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 17/05/2014 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/73/2013 of District Bidar)
 
1. M/s. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd.
No.10003,-E-8. E.P.IP.RIICO Industrial area, Sitapur, Jaipur, Rajasthan-3020222 Now represented by M/s Shriram General Insurance Company ltd, No.302, 3rd floor, S S Corner building, Opp: Bowring and C
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Gurnath S/o. Baslingappa
R/o No.29, Village Aurad B, Taluk Aurad B , District Bidar
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Huluvadi G. Ramesh PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar JUDICIAL MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 21 Jan 2022
Final Order / Judgement

O R D E R

Mr. K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

Sri. B.T files N.O.C Vakalath for Respondent. This is an Appeal filed u/s 15 of C.P Act, 1986 by OP, aggrieved by the order dated 17.05.2014 passed by District Forum Bidar in CC-No.73/2013.

2.      The Commission heard learned counsel for appellant and respondent.  Learned counsel for appellant submits that, appellant/OP although represented by learned counsel failed to submit version is one aspect, but facts remains that, he submits that the surveyor has assessed the loss to the tune of Rs.84,601.65, which is already paid to the insured/financier.  On the contrary, learned counsel for respondent submits that, District Forum has rightly allowed the complaint on the basis of materials placed by complainant, for which counsel for appellant submits that the amount awarded was on the basis of estimation.  It is to be noted herein that, in this appeal, from the available papers   Commission is not in a position to examine all those factual issues which are argued by learned counsels for the parties to the appeal.  In such circumstances, it would be just and proper to remand back the matter to Commission to decide the case afresh, affording opportunities to both parties with a direction to decide the complaint as early as possible not later than 03 months from the date of receipt of this order, for which the parties to this appeal and their counsels are directed to co-operate the District Commission. All the contentions are left open for the parties to the complaint.  It is hereby observed although, appellant/OP at this belated stage has already lost his right to file version, but facts remains that, the Commission  has to appreciate the documents placed by complainant and to enable to do so in our view it would be just and proper to  permit OP to produce all the documents and the Commission is directed to  receive the documents to appreciate the case of the complainant.  Accordingly the impugned order passed by the Commission below is set aside and matter stands remanded back to decide as directed.

3.      Amount in deposit is directed to be transferred to the District Commission for needful.

4.      Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties to the appeal.

 

  Lady Member                                 Judicial Member

*J*   

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Huluvadi G. Ramesh]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Krishnamurthy B.Sangannavar]
JUDICIAL MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Smt. Divyashree.M]
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.