Delhi

StateCommission

A/11/36

KARAM SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

OIC LTD.& ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

25 Apr 2016

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: Delhi

(Constituted under section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

                

                      Date of Argument: 25.04.2016

Date of Decision: 03.05.2016

 

 

First Appeal-36/2011

                 

 

        In the Matter of:

               

                Sh. Karam Singh,

          S/o Sh. Dalip Singh,

          R/o C-53, Nangloi, Phase-II,

          Delhi.

 

……Appellant     Versus     1. M/s Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Office: 23/23 B EMCA House, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi   2. M/s Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Regd. Office: A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi-110002   3. The S.H.O. P.S. Seelampur, Delhi   4. The Commissioner of Police, IP Estate, Police Head Quarters, New Delhi                                                                …….Respondent

CORAM

  O.P. Gupta, Member (Judicial)

 

1.   Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the   judgment? 

2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

O.P. Gupta, Member (Judicial)

 

1.             Challenge in the present appeal is to order dated 29.12.2010 passed by District Consumer Forum (North) in complaint case No. 143/2009. The District Forum held that the complaint was not maintainable as complainant/appellant was not a consumer within the meaning of section 2 (1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act. The reason for arriving at said conclusion is that complainant laid claim from insurance company in respect of Bus No. DL-1P-B/0103 which was being plied on route No. 236 from Nangloi to Anand Vihar. The bus met with an accident and was taken to be possession by police. During police custody certain parts of the bus went missing for which FIR No. 460/08 u/s 409 IPC was registered. Since the bus was a commercial vehicle, the District Forum found that the complainant did not come within the meaning of Consumer.

2.             The appellant has assailed on the said findings on the basis of decision of National Commission in Harsolia Motors Vs. NIC I (2005) CPJ 27. It was held in the said case that insurance stands on different footing.

3.             The said decision has been reiterated by National Commission in RR International Vs. New India Assurance Co. II (2013) CPJ 486. Hence, the impugned order cannot be allowed to be sustained. The appeal is accepted, impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the District Forum for decision on merits.

                Parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on 03.06.2016.

                Copy of the order be sent to both the parties free of costs and one copy of the order be sent to District Forum for information.

                File be consigned to record room.

        (O.P. Gupta)

Member (Judicial)