Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

A/19/1392

KAPTAN SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC LIC LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

14 Feb 2023

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

 

                                    FIRST APPEAL NO. 1392 OF 2019

(Arising out of order dated 27.06.2019 passed in C.C.No.457/2018 by District Commission, Gwalior)

 

KAPTAN SINGH.                                                                                                    …          APPELLANT

 

Versus

                 

MANAGER, HDFC LIFE INSURANCE CO.LTD.                                                 …         RESPONDENTS.                                      

 

BEFORE:

 

                  HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU S. KEMKAR     :      PRESIDENT

                  HON’BLE DR. (MRS) MONIKA MALIK                          :      MEMBER  

                                    

 

                                      O R D E R

14.02.2023.

 

          Shri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant.

            Shri Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the respondent.

                       

As per Shri Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar :                       

            This appeal arises out of the order dated 27.06.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gwalior (for short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.457/2018, whereby the District Commission has dismissed the complaint filed by the complainant/appellant holding that the dispute as raised by the complainant/appellant cannot be decided in summary proceedings as it requires detailed evidence to be recorded.

2.                Having gone through the pleadings and evidence filed by the parties we find that two aspects were to be decided by the District Commission. Firstly, whether the complainant approached the opposite

 

-2-

party for lodging the claim within time as according to opposite party the complainant has lodged the death claim of his deceased brother Chaviram 

on 03.04.2017 whereas according to the complainant himself the death occurred on 24.08.2015. The second question as to whether deceased Chaviram died on 24.08.2015 or 22.11.2014 as was claimed by the opposite party on the basis of investigation report of the investigator.

3.                In our considered view there was enough evidence available on recoird and the matter could have been very well decided by the District Commission itself in summary proceedings.

4.                As a result, the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is remanded to the District Commission for deciding it on merits on the basis of evidence produced by the parties.

5.                Parties are directed to appear before the District Commission on 20.03.2023.

6.                With the aforesaid observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.   

                                                           

          (Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar)         (Dr. Monika Malik)   

                      President                                    Member