NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/128/2022

M/S. JAI MATA DI & COMPANY - Complainant(s)

Versus

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. YASHARTH KANT, MR. VIKAS SRIVASTAVA & MS. ANAMIKA YADAV

05 Nov 2024

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
FIRST APPEAL NO. 128 OF 2022
(Against the Order dated 02/12/2021 in Complaint No. 67/2013 of the State Commission Uttar Pradesh)
1. M/S. JAI MATA DI & COMPANY
SHRI DURGA PRASAD AGRAHARI, S/O LATE SHRI RAM PRASAD, R/O 97/120 UNCHAMANDI, ALLAHABAD
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
9TH FLOOR, INDIRA BHAVAN, CIVIL LINES, ALLAHABAD
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA,PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE AVM J. RAJENDRA, AVSM VSM (Retd.),MEMBER

FOR THE APPELLANT :

Dated : 05 November 2024
ORDER

For the Appellant         (s)      :        Mr. Yasharth Kant, Mr. Usman G. Khan and

                                              Ms. Sonal Kushwaha, Advocates     

         

Dated : 05.11.2024

ORDER (ORAL)

                Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

          Essentially, the matter pertains to amendment in the Complaint at a belated stage so as to implead Union Bank of India which provided the banking services to the Complainant and states that the Complainant

 

-2-

had an insurance policy through Union Bank of India, Branch Chowk, 37, Sheo Charan Lal Road, Allahabad and had facilitated regular payments of premium with respect to the policy in question.  However, there has been certain alleged deficiency in service on the part of the Bank as a consequence of which the policy was rendered infructuous and thus the claim.

          Learned Counsel for the Appellant/Complainant submits that the Complainant is a small time trader and was ill-advised and therefore, did not appreciate the impleadment of the Bank as Respondent in the matter.  He discovered this with respect to deficiency on the part of the Bank only at a belated stage.  He admits that there has been substantial delay of about eight years in making this discovery and states that on account of background of the Complainant and the advice given to him, he was not able to realize the requirement of impleading the Bank as a Respondent.  As a consequence of deficiency in service by the Bank also the policy became void and the Bank needs to be impleaded.  He states that the ends of justice would be met by merely allowing the impleadment of the Bank in the Complaint and directing the State Commission to decide the matter as per law.

          Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and perused the records.

-3-

          We are satisfied with the request of the Appellant so as to implead the Bank as a party to the Appeal before the State Commission.  The order of the State Commission dated 02.12.2021 is set aside and the Appellant is allowed to amend the Complaint so as to include the Bank in question and proceed with the proceedings in the matter.

All the parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on the date already fixed before it, i.e. 14.11.2024. 

          The learned State Commission is requested to consider the matter as per law preferably within a period of four months.

          With these directions, First Appeal No.128 of 2022 stands disposed of.

          All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of accordingly.

          Order dasti.

 
......................................
SUBHASH CHANDRA
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
...................................................................................
AVM J. RAJENDRA, AVSM VSM (Retd.)
MEMBER

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.