Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.TLY branch, PB No.40, Bank Road, Kannur1, V/S V. Siddique, AV House, No 3 Punchayal, PO Mettammel , KNR. - Consumer Court Case

Kerala

Kannur

CC/129/2006

V. Siddique, AV House, No 3 Punchayal, PO Mettammel , KNR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.TLY branch, PB No.40, Bank Road, Kannur1, - Opp.Party(s)

14 Oct 2008

ORDER

In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/129/2006

V. Siddique, AV House, No 3 Punchayal, PO Mettammel , KNR.						...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.TLY branch, PB No.40, Bank Road, Kannur1,						...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):

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

This is a petition to condone the delay in filing the above complaint. The above complaint filed with a delay of 453 days. Petitioner/Complainant preferred a claim before the oppoiste party/Respondent for realising the amount spent for the repair of his motor cycle which was insured with the oppoiste prty. The claim of the petitioner dismissed by the oppoiste party on17.3.2003. He was abroad at that time and couldnot file the complaint in time. The above explanation is not at all convincing nature so as to condone the delay. Petitioner/complainant should have been attempted to convince the Forum by placing facts that prevented him from taking steps to file complaint before the Forum. His physical presence is not a must to file a complaint before the Forum. Then what is prevented him from filing the complaint has not been brought before the Forum to convinces there are sufficient cause so as to condone the delay of such 453 days. Hence the petition dismissed and consequently the complaint closed. Sd/- President Sd/- Member Sd/- Member /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur

This is a petition to condone the delay in filing the above complaint. The above complaint filed with a delay of 453 days. Petitioner/Complainant preferred a claim before the oppoiste party/Respondent for realising the amount spent for the repair of his motor cycle which was insured with the oppoiste prty. The claim of the petitioner dismissed by the oppoiste party on17.3.2003. He was abroad at that time and couldnot file the complaint in time. The above explanation is not at all convincing nature so as to condone the delay. Petitioner/complainant should have been attempted to convince the Forum by placing facts that prevented him from taking steps to file complaint before the Forum. His physical presence is not a must to file a complaint before the Forum. Then what is prevented him from filing the complaint has not been brought before the Forum to convinces there are sufficient cause so as to condone the delay of such 453 days. Hence the petition dismissed and consequently the complaint closed. Sd/- President Sd/- Member Sd/- Member /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur