BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.

                                                                      Complaint No.:336 of 2014.

                                                                      Date of Institution: 03.12.2014.

                                                                      Date of Decision:14.12.2015

Radhey Shyam son of Sh. Ganga Din, resident of village Sundroj, Tehsil and District Rewari.

                                                                        ….Complainant.

                                        Versus

1. Reliance General Insurance Co. Limited, SCO 212-214, Ist Floor Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, through its Branch Manager.
2. TATA Motor Finance Ltd., Gurgaon Branch, Devi Place Office, A-7, A-8, 1^st Floor Prem Nagar, Gurgaon, through its Branch Manager.
3. TATA Motor Finance Ltd. Dhingra Motors, Rewari.                                                                                                                                                                                                                             …...Opposite Parties. 

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT

BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President

                   Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member

Present:- Shri Om Parmar, Advocate, for complainant/applicant.

ORDER:-

Rajesh Jindal, President:

                    By this order an application dated 03.12.2014 filed by the applicant/complainant for condonation of delay of 17 days would be disposed of.  As per the contents of the application the order dated 16.09.2014 passed by the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana was the final order between the party and the time in filing the fresh complaint in the competent Forum has been spent more than 77 days and there is delay of 17 days for filing the present complaint because the complainant was sick and is resident of District Rewari.  On the said ground the applicant/complainant has sought the condonation of delay for 17 days.

2.                We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant/complainant and examined the relevant record.

3.                 We have perused the order dated 16.09.2014 which has been passed by the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana in Civil Misc. Application No. 19 of 2014 in complaint case No. 1240 of 2012 titled as Reliance General Insurance Vs. Radhey Shyam etc. Three lines order has been passed by the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana which is reproduced below:-

1.      Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that this civil miscellaneous application be dismissed as withdrawn.

2.      It is ordered accordingly.

4.                 The said order has been passed by the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana for the dismissal of the civil application which was withdrawn by the applicant.  In this order no permission has been granted by the Hon’ble State Commission to the present complainant or applicant for filing the fresh complaint in the competent Forum.  Our attention was drawn to the order dated 07.12.2012 passed by the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana in First Appeal No. 1240 of 2012 titled as Reliance General Insurance Vs. Radhey Shyam etc.  The relevant portion of the said order is reproduced below:-

                    Accordingly, this appeal is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the complaint is ordered to be returned to be presented before forum having jurisdiction.

                 However, in terms of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works Versus PSG Industries Institute (1995) 3 SCC 583, the petitioner/complainant may seek exemption/condonation of the time spent before the Consumer Forum/Commission to avail remedy before the competent Court if jurisdiction, within a period of 60 days from the date of passing of this order, if so advised.   

5.                From the perusal of the above said orders, it is clear that the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana has allowed the applicant/complainant to file fresh complaint in the competent district Forum having the jurisdiction vide order dated 07.12.2012 and the complainant was directed to file the complaint within 60 days from the date of passing of the said order and he was given liberty to seek condonation of delay for the time spent before the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana.  From the perusal of the said both orders, the complainant was bound to file the complaint within 60 days from the date of 07.12.2012.  The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this District Forum on 03.12.2014 about after 2 years.  The complainant has not mentioned about the order dated 07.12.2012 of the Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana in his application for condonation of delay vide which he was given liberty to file the fresh complaint.  The complainant has made an effort to misguide this District Forum by alleging that there is delay of 17 days in filing of the present complaint.  The application of the complainant is beyond the actual facts and the complainant cannot be allowed to abuse the process of law by concealing the true facts.  The complainant has not come with clean hands before this District Forum.  The act and conduct of the complainant/applicant is condemnable.  In view of the above discussion, the application of the complainant/applicant is dismissed and resultantly the complaint of the complainant is also dismissed being time barred.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum.

Dated: 14.12.2015.                            

      (Rajesh Jindal)                             

President,

                                                            District Consumer Disputes

                                                            Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.

(Ansuya Bishnoi)                     

                                             Member