Maharashtra

StateCommission

A/10/1193

SMT SUNITA DATTATRAY JADHAV - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICILOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD - Opp.Party(s)

A N JADHAV

25 Nov 2010

ORDER


BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
First Appeal No. A/10/1193
(Arisen out of Order Dated 26/07/2010 in Case No. 257/08 of District DCF, South Mumbai)
1. SMT SUNITA DATTATRAY JADHAV R/O MALOLI TAL MALSHIRAS SOLAPUR MAHARASHTRA ...........Appellant(s)

Versus
1. ICICILOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ZENITH HOUSE KESHAVRAO KHADE MARG MAHALAXMI MUMBAI MUMBAIMAHARASHTRA ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE :
Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar PRESIDING MEMBERHon'ble Mrs. S.P.Lale Member
PRESENT :A N JADHAV , Advocate for the Appellant 1

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.

ORDER

PER SHRI P.N.KASHALKAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

Heard Adv. Jadhao for appellant. This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the order passed by District Forum, South Mumbai rejecting condonation delay application filed in Complaint Case No.257/2008.

          The appellant herein filed complaint after lapse of 410 days in the Forum. After hearing both parties and after careful consideration, Forum below by passing the order on 26/07/2010 rejected the application for condonation delay. The said condonation application stated that, the cause of action of the complainant took place on 19/04/200521/10/2005. The opposite party repudiated the complainant’s claim on the ground of delay of 123 days and thereafter the complainant filed his complaint before forum below on 20/12/2008. Hence there was delay of 410 days which are not properly explained by showing sufficient ground for seeking delay condonation. The said order is appearing to be just and proper. Therefore we are not inclined to condone the dalay of 410 in filing the complaint by allowing this appeal. As such we pass the following order. and complainant forwarded his claim to the Insurance Company on

 

ORDER

 

Appeal is summarily rejected.

No order as to cost

Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.

PRONOUNCED :
Dated : 25 November 2010

[Hon'ble Mr. P.N. Kashalkar]PRESIDING MEMBER[Hon'ble Mrs. S.P.Lale]Member