C.D.A. No. 1357 of 2003 &
C.D.A.No.1358 of 2003
Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent. The documents for reconstruction of DFR not filed without filing documents for reconstruction of DFR, we are inclined to dispose of the matter at this stage. Both appeals aise out of common impugned order.
2. Here is an appeal filed u/s 15 of the erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’). Parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the District Forum.
3. On going through the impugned order, the pleadings of the parties is clear that during subsistence of the policy purchased by the complainant from the O.P the vehicle met accident. The claim was made but it was repudiated as the complainant did not produce the documents .
4. After hearing of both parties the learned President allowed the complaint but the learned Member disagreed the order passed by the learned President but she submitted that the claim should be settled as per the surveyor ‘s report.
5. It appears from the appeal memo that they have computed the loss but they could not settle the claim.Therefore, he submitted that since both the Member and President allowed the complaint, the appeal should be disposed of in terms of surveyor’s report.
6. Considered the submissions. In view of the fact that the O.P has not settled the claim in spite of surveyor’s report is itself deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. Therefore, the appeal is allowed and the matter rremandd again to the learned District Forum with direction after hearing of both parties pass speaking order in accorance with law. While disposing the case the learned District Forum should keep in mind the claim has not been settled.
7. Therefore, both the appeals are allowed.
Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties or the copy of this order be downloaded from Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy supplied from this Commission.
