Orissa

Ganjam

CC/35/2015

Rajendra Prasad Acharya - Complainant(s)

Versus

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Rep. its Chairman - Opp.Party(s)

For the complainant: Sri Datatraya Behera, Advocate.

30 Apr 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, GANJAM, BERHAMPUR.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/35/2015
( Date of Filing : 09 Nov 2015 )
 
1. Rajendra Prasad Acharya
S/o. Late Haribandhu Acharya, At/ P.O. Kalasandhapur, P.S. Aska
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Rep. its Chairman
Having Reg. office. Oriental House, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi.
2. Regional Office
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., At/P.O. Aska
3. Utkal Grameen Bank
Regional Office At. Harsha Arcade Zenana Hospital Road, At/P.O. Berhampur
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Panigrahi PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Saritri Pattanaik MEMBER
 
PRESENT:For the complainant: Sri Datatraya Behera, Advocate. , Advocate for the Complainant 1
 For the O.P.No.1 & 2: Sri P.C.Panigrahy, Advocate., Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
 For the O.P.No.3: Sri P.Chandra sekhar Patro, Advocate. , Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 30 Apr 2024
Final Order / Judgement

 

                                                DATE OF DISPOSAL: 30.04.2024

 

 

EXTRACT COPY OF ORDER DATED 30.04.2024.

            Both the parties are found absent on repeated calls and no steps filed by them.

The Commission perused the case record and it is revealed that, the complainant already received legitimate insurance amount from the O.P.No.1 & 2 with full and final satisfaction and not made any objection while accepting the said insurance amount in the years 2014. The O.P.No.1 & 2 filed the corroborated document as Annexure-C in reference to final settlement of insurance claim in between the complainant and O.P.NMo.1 & 2. The O.P.No.3 is a banker having no role to play in the case for settlement of the insurance claim.

            While matter stood thus the Lrs of the complainant are also not substituted their names with the complainant timely. Even after also, the Commission taken lenient views and allow the parties to put forth their pleas but they remained silent over it and not attended the Commission at all.

            In view of the above circumstances, the complaint has no pillars to stand. Resultantly, the complaint is dismissed against the Opposite Parties on contest.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Satish Kumar Panigrahi]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Saritri Pattanaik]
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.