NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/2443/2024

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD - Complainant(s)

Versus

SHAILENDRA KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

MR. NAVNEET KUMAR

20 Sep 2024

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 2443 OF 2024
(Against the Order dated 10/04/2024 in Appeal No. A/219/2024 of the State Commission Delhi)
1. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
STELLAR IT PARK TOWER 1 5TH FLOOR C 25 SECTOR 62 NOIDA U P 201301
GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR
UTTAR PRADESH
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. SHAILENDRA KUMAR
S O KEDAR SINGH TOMAR R O 470 FIRST FLOOR POCKET E MAYUR VIHAR PHASE 2 DELHI 110091
EAST
DELHI
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SAROJ YADAV,PRESIDING MEMBER

FOR THE PETITIONER :
FOR THE PETITIONER(S) : MR. NAVNEET KUMAR, ADVOCATE

Dated : 20 September 2024
ORDER

Heard Mr. Navneet Kumar learned Counsel for the Revisionist. He submitted that the learned Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has dismissed the first appeal in limine on the point of delay of 24 days. He has not been provided opportunity of being heard on merits though he explained the delay. He relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Civil Appeal No.6723 of 2019 whereby the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that the Court should take liberal view in condonation of delay. He specifically relied upon on following Para:

 

We may consider it apposite to observe that the Commission while declining to condone the delay placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Ram Lal & Ors.vs. Rewa Coalfields  Limited, AIR 1962 SC 361. However, the later decision of this Court in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. vs. Mst Katiji & Ors. (1987) 2 SCC 107 has held that in matter of condonation of delay, the Court should take liberal view. In our view, the Commission should have, therefore, taken note of subsequent decisions of this Court also on the issue of condonation of delay.”

 

          He submitted that delay was caused as he has not received the free copy from the DCDRC (East), Saini Enclave, Govt. of NCT of Delhi. Therefore, the Revisionist applied for certified copy and got prepared the first appeal and filed. The delay was not deliberate, hence, the State Commission should not have dismissed its appeal in limine. The learned Counsel for the Revisionist prayed to set aside the order passed by the State Commission and to direct the State Commission to hear the Parties on merits after giving notice to both the Parties.

          Considered the arguments and gone through the relevant documents and also the impugned order passed by the State Commission. For the sake of justice it appears just to set aside the impugned order dated 10.04.2024.  The State Commission is directed to hear the matter on merits after giving the notice to both the Parties. The Revisionist shall appear before the State Commission on 07.10.2024.

          This Revision Petition is disposed off accordingly.

 
............................J
SAROJ YADAV
PRESIDING 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.