Per Shri B.A.Shaikh, Hon’ble Presiding Member.
1. Advocate Mr.W.G.Paunikar is present for the appellant. No one for the respondent No.1 is present. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are already proceeded ex-parte. We have heard advocate of the appellant on the application made for condonation of delay by the appellant and as well as on merits of the appeal. We have perused the record and proceedings of the appeal.
2) This appeal is filed by the original opposite party (for short O.P.) No.1 Insurance Company feeling aggrieved by an order dated 24/04/2017 by which the District Consumer Forum Yavatmal partly allowed the consumer complaint bearing No.125/2012 and directed the O.P. as follows.
The O.P. to pay original complainant/respondent No.1 herein sum assured of Rs.2,00,000/- under the policy with interest @ 12% P.A. from 31/03/2010 till its realization by her and also to pay her expenses of Rs.28,677/- incurred by her for the treatment of her deceased life assured son and the O.P. also to pay her Rs.20,000/- as compensation for physical and mental harassment and litigation cost of Rs.7,000/-.
3. The appellant alongwith the appeal filed application for condonation of delay of 150 days that occurred in filing of the appeal. The learned advocate of the appellant explained that delay in short to the effect that the impugned order was passed on 24/07/2017 and its copy was delivered to the appellant on 01/07/2017. The said copy of the impugned order was received by Regional Office of Nagpur on 29/08/2017. Then legal opinion of the advocate was called, which consumed some time. The legal opinion was then received for filing of appeal. The entire case papers were called from the original office which also consumed some time. The case papers were entrusted to the advocate on 26/10/2017 for filing appeal. Some time was also consumed for collecting statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- required to be deposited for filing of appeal. Therefore the learned advocate of the appellant requested that the delay that occurred in filing of the appeal may be condoned.
4. We find that there is actual delay of 142 days that occurred in filing of appeal. The said delay is very long and no satisfactory explanation of the said delay is given by the appellant. No such long period of 142 days can be occurred during these days simply filing of appeal after getting the copy of impugned order as said the delay can be curtailed by taking necessary steps with the help of internet technology. The appellant has not shown diligence in taking the said steps for filing of the appeal. The delay can be said to have been occurred because of inaction on the part of the appellant and hence the delay of 142 days can not be condoned and appeal deserves to be dismissed as time barred.
5. Even though appeal is time barred we considered it on merits also. We find that admittedly the deceased Ravi the son of the respondent No.1 had purchased the policy called as “Nagrik Suraksha Policy” from the appellant for the period from 10/12/2009 to 14/12/2011. He suffered injury in an accident due to falling of heavy stone on his head when he was working inside the well. Therefore he was admitted in the hospital. He died during treatment on 16/04/2010. Thus his death was covered under the above policy. The sum assured under the policy was of Rs.2,00,000/-. Moreover medical expenses incurred by the respondent No.1 for his treatment amounting to Rs.28,677/- were also covered under the policy. The main defence raised by the appellant before the Forum below was that no cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the said Forum so as to entertain and decide the said complaint.
6. However the Forum has found that the premium was paid by the deceased through the appellant which carries on its insurance business within the territorial jurisdiction of the said Forum. We also find that the District Consumer Forum below has rightly held that it has jurisdiction to entertain and to decide the complaint.
7. Thus we are of the considered view that the Forum below has correctly held that the respondent No.1/original complainant is entitled to sum assured of Rs.2,00,000/- with interest @ 12% P.A. and also entitled to medical expenses of Rs.28,677/- incurred by her for treatment of her deceased son. Moreover the Forum below has also rightly held that the respondent No.1 is entitled to compensation of Rs.20,000/- for physical and mental harassment and litigation cost of Rs.7,000/-. There is no merit in this appeal and hence it deserves to be dismissed
// ORDER //
- The appeal is dismissed on both counts, that is it is time barred and it has got no merits.
- No order as to cost in appeal.
- Copy of order be furnished to both parties free of cost.
