Rajasthan

StateCommission

A/177/2019

Cholamandalam MS Genral Insurnce Co.Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Rajkumar Chaudhary s/o Bhajan Singh - Opp.Party(s)

Ravindra Sharma

11 Mar 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 177 /2019

 

Chola Mandlam MS General Insurance Co.Ltd. Unit No. 704-707, 7^th floor Signature Tower, DC 2, Lalkothi Scheme, Tonk Road, Jaipur.

Vs.

Rajkumar Chaudhary s/o Bhajan Singh r/o Near Kelwara Masjid, Post Kelwara, Tehsil Shahabad Distt. Baran & ors.

 

 

Date of Order 11.3.2019

 

Before:

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta- President

Mrs. Meena Mehta -Member

 

Mr. Ravindra Sharmacounsel for the appellant

 

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION ( PER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NISHA GUPTA,PRESIDENT):

2

 

This appeal is filed against the order of the learned District Forum, Baran dated 4.9.2018 whereby the appellant is directed to decide the claim of the complainant within one month.

 

The appeal has been filed with delay of 144 days. Application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act has been submitted wherein only this much has been said that the head office is at Chennai hence, file has been sent there and due to the official procedure the appeal could not file in time. No details have been submitted for the particular delay.

 

Reliance could be placed on IV (2016) CPJ 178 (NC) Reliance General Insurance Co. Vs. Shri Pariyojna Nirman Pvt.Ltd. where the National Commission has held that term sufficient cause cannot be erased from s.5 of the Limitation Act by adopting the excessive liberal approach. The officers of the company should not sit over the documents. They should decide the case immediately.

 

Further reliance could be placed on 2018 (2) CPR 573 (NC) Parsvanath Developer Vs. Praful Vinod where the

3

 

National Commission was of the view that expression sufficient cause cannot be construed liberally if negligence , inaction or lack of bonafide are attributable to party praying for exercise os such discretion in its favour.

 

Further reliance could be placed on 2018 (2) CPR 612 (NC) Shriram General Insurance Vs. Sandeep Ghosh where the National Commission has held that entertainment of belated appeal and revision in consumer matters after expiry of special period of limitation defeat very object of expeditious adjudication of consumer disputes.

 

Here in the present case the Forum below has only ordered for disposal of the complainant's claim within one month but the appellant has not complied with the order and this belated appeal has been filed with no justification. The application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act is deliberately silent on the fact that why and where delay has been committed.

 

Looking at the merits of the case the appellant has not disposed of the claim inspite of the fact that date of loss was 10.12.2016 and the Forum below has only ordered for

4

 

disposal of the claim. Hence, on merit also the case of the appellant is meritless.

 

In view of the above, application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act stands dismissed and so also the appeal.

 

(Meena Mehta) (Nisha Gupta)

Member President

 

nm