STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA    

                                      Consumer Complaint No.18 of 2021

                                      Date of Institution: 16.04.2021

                                      Date of Decision: 27.04.2021

M/s Haryana Bardana Trading Company, Railway Road Kaithal 136027 (Haryana) through Vinod Bansal being Power of Attorney Holder of proprietor Shri Ram Bansal son of Shri Bikha Ram Bansal, resident of # 333/12, Ashoka Garden Colony, Near Jaat School, Kaithal.

…..Complainant

VERSUS

1.      New India Assurance Company Ltd. above Bank of Baroda (earlier Vijaya Bank), Ambala Road Kaithal, District Kaithal, through its Divisional Manager/Concerned Officer.

2.      Punjab National Bank, Karnal Road Kaithal, District Kaithal.

….. Opposite Parties

CORAM:    Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.P.S. Mann, President.

                   Shri Harnam Singh Thakur, Judicial Member.                  

Present:-    Shri Aman Pal, counsel for the complainant.

              *****

(Proceedings through whatsapp audio call)                  

                                                O R D E R

T.P.S. MANN, J. (ORAL)

          File taken up today as it could not be taken up on 26.04.2021 for the reason that the State Commission was closed as a mark of respect to the departed soul of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, who unfortunately passed away on 24.04.2021.

2.      The complainant had paid premium of Rs.51,676/-, therefore, the State Commission has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in C.C. No.833 of 2020, M/s Pyaridevi Chabiraj Steels Private Limited Vs. National Insurance Company Limited, decided on 28.08.2020.

3.      Faced with the above, learned counsel for the complainant states that he may be allowed to withdraw the present complaint with liberty to file a fresh complaint on the same cause of action before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

4.      In view of the above, the complaint is hereby dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the complainant to file a fresh complaint on the same cause of action before the District Consumer Commission.