Heard learned counsel for both sides.
2. Here is an appeal filed u/s 15 of the erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’). Parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the District Forum.
3. It is a case where the complainant has purchased the four wheeler being financed by OP No.2. The vehicle was insured with OP No.1 for the period from 29.10.2007 to 28.10.2008. The vehicle allegedly was stolen away on 15/16.9.2008 and the matter was reported to the police and the insurer. The surveyor was deputed and he made the survey but OP No.1 repudiated the claim. So, the complaint was filed.
4. OP No.1 filed written version stating that they have no any deficiency in service as they have already deputed surveyor and found no document was filed for which they have settled the claim as “No Claim”.
5. OP No.2 filed written version separately and according to him he is the financer and he has nothing to say in this case except payment of the loan amount. There is no any deficiency in service on their part.
6. Consider the submission of learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the DFR including the impugned order.
7. It appears from the order of the learned District Forum that they have not framed the issues to settle the claim. They have not discussed the materials available on record. Therefore, the appeal is allowed by remanding the matter to the learned District Forum to hear both the parties afresh and pass speaking order in accordance with law within a period of 45 days from the date of production of copy of this order before it. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned District Forum on 25.7.2022 to receive further instruction from it.
DFR be sent back forthwith.
Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties or the copy of this order be downloaded from Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy supplied from this Commission.
