Haryana

Karnal

CC/605/2019

Krishan Pal - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Mange Ram Sangwan

24 Aug 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                                     Complaint No.605 of 2019

                                                                     Date of instt. 05.09.2019

                                                                     Date of Decision: 24.08.2021

 

Krishan Pal son of Ram Mehar, resident of Village Atawla, Tehsil and District Panipat.

                                                                             …….Complainant

                                                 Versus

 

 

1.       HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited, through its Branch Manager, SO No.237, Second Floor, Sector-12, Karnal.

2.       HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited, through its Senior Manager, Ist Floor, HDFC House 165-166, Back Bay reclamation, HT Pareksh Marg Church Gate, Mumbai-400020.

                                                                             …..Opposite parties.

 

 

Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before        Sh. Jaswant Singh………President.        

                   Sh. Vineet Kaushik……… Member

 

 

 

Present:     None for complainant.

                   Shri Sanjeev Vohra, counsel for OPs. 

 

         

                   Today the case was fixed for arguments on behalf of complainant on the main complaint as well as for consideration on contempt application. Arguments on behalf of OPs already heard on 09.07.2021. On 09.07.2021, also none had appeared on behalf of complainant, however, in the interest of justice, case was adjourned to 30.07.2021 for arguments on behalf of complainant. On 30.07.2021, again none had appeared on behalf of complainant and case was again adjourned to 11.08.2021 for arguments on behalf of complainant. On 11.08.2021, again none had appeared on behalf of complainant and case was adjourned for today i.e. 24.08.2021. Today, also none has appeared on behalf of complainant despite repeated calls. It seems that the complainant is not interested to pursue the present complaint. It is already 04:00 PM. Further wait is not justified. Hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution. Since, the complaint has been dismissed, therefore, contempt application is also stands disposed of, accordingly.

          However, the complainant is at liberty to file fresh complaint on the same cause of action in the court of competent jurisdiction, if so desired. Party concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

 

Announced
Dated: 24.08.2021                                              

                                                                                              President,         

District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Karnal.

(Vineet Kaushik)     

     Member