KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

FIRST APPEAL 557/09

JUDGMENT DATED: 15.10.2010

PRESENT

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU  : PRESIDENT

P.Fathima,                                          :APPELLANT

Parottagath House,

Karnvanchal, Alakkod.

(By Adv. Sreevaraham N.G.Mahesh)

       Vs.

The Branch Manager,                         : RESPONDENT

New India Assurance Co.Ltd.,

Branch Office, Temple Road,

Payyanoor.

(By Adv.Sreevaraham G.Satheesh)

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU  : PRESIDENT

          The appellant is the complainant in CC.279/05 in the file of CDRF, Kannaur.  The Forum has dismissed the complaint on the ground of limitation. 

          2. The case of the complainant is that her vehicle was stolen on 30.7.01.  The claim was submitted on 5.8.02 and the complainant received a letter form the opposite parties to produce copy of the agreement.  On 17.1.05 the complainant produced a certified copy of report but the claim has not been settled.  Subsequently she sent a lawyer notice.  It is alleged that the contentions   in the reply notice  that  she had transferred the vehicle  to one Odakkal Joy and thereafter to one Mr. Benny Sebastian. The purchase value of the vehicle/jeep is Rs.3,41,741/-.

          3The contention of the opposite parties is that at the time of the alleged theft the real owner was Mr.Benny Sebastian which was revealed the investigation conducted .  It is pointed out that the RC of the vehicle has not been transferred to Mr.Benny Sebastian.  It is also alleged that the opposite party had sent a repudiation letter dated 30.8.02 which was received by the complainant.  The complaint has been filed only on 31.1.2005.  Hence it is barred by limitation.

          4. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of DW1 Exts.A1, B1,B1 (1) to B1(4). 

          5. The Forum has noted that Ext.A1 dated 20.8.02 is the letter received by the complainant vide Ext.B1(4) which is the postal acknowledgment signed by the complainant.  Ext.B1 is the repudiation letter which dated 16.9.02.  It is not denied that Ext.B1(4) contained the signature of the complainant.  The Forum has noted that the date of Ext.A1 is 20.8.02 whereas that of B1 is 16.9.02.  The postal acknowledgment is dated 17.9.02.  Hence it was noted that it is unlikely that Ext.A1 dated 20.8.02 would have been received on 17.9.02 as contented by the complainant.  The Forum has also noted that the complainant has not testified whereas the opposite party has deposed and was cross examined. If 17.9.02 has to be taken as the date receiving Ext.B1 letter of repudiation it would be 3 years 1 month and 14 days from the date of receipt of Ext.B1
which is noted in the order of the Forum.  Hence we find that there is no illegality in the order of the Forum.

          6. In the result the appeal is dismissed.

          Office will forward the LCR to the Forum urgently along with the copy of this order.

          JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU  : PRESIDENT

ps