West Bengal

StateCommission

FA/557/2010

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shri Gouranga Himghar Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. S. N. Dutta.

01 Feb 2011

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
BHABANI BHAWAN (Gr. Floor),
31, Belvedere Road, Kolkata - 700027
 
FA No: 557 Of 2010
(Arisen out of Order Dated 22/04/2010 in Case No. 327/2000 of District Kolkata-II)
 
1. The National Insurance Co. Ltd.
3, Middleton Street, Kolkata - 700 071
2. The Regional Manager
Calcutta Regional Office
3. The Divisioanl Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.
19, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata - 700 001.
4. The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Bentick Street Branch, 23, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata - 700 001.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Shri Gouranga Himghar Pvt. Ltd.
Vill. & P.O. Gurap, Dist. Hooghly
2. Rampada Paul
Vill. & P.O. Gurap, Dist. Hooghly
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. SHANKAR COARI Member
 
For the Appellant:Mr. S. N. Dutta., Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Barun Prasad., Advocate
 Mr. Barun Prasad., Advocate
ORDER

No. 3/01.02.2011.

 

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA, PRESIDENT.

 

Appellant through Mr. S. N. Dutta, the Ld. Advocate and Respondents through Mr. Barun Prasad, the Ld. Advocate are present.

 

This is an application for condonation of delay in filing this appeal.  The appeal has been filed out of time by about 122 days.  The impugned order was passed on 22.04.2010.  The Petitioner – Appellant applied for the certified copy on 06.05.2010 which was made ready on 10.05.2010.  It has been stated in the above application that the Complainant had filed two separate but similar complaint being Nos. 327 & 328 of 2000 before the Forum below.  The impugned order has been passed in Complaint Case No. 327.  Even after receipt of the said certified copy on 18.06.2010 the Appellant – Petitioner was waiting unnecessarily for the other Complaint Case No. 328 being disposed of without filing the present appeal.  It has been stated in this application that the delay has occasioned because the Appellant wanted to file the present appeal after disposal of the aforesaid complaint case No. 328.  The two cases having been separately filed, may be on a similar facts and circumstances the Appellant had no reasonable cause and excuse for waiting till the disposal of the other Complaint Case No. 328 of 2000 for the purpose of filing the present appeal.  The Appellant, therefore, chose not to file the present appeal without any reasonable cause and excuse which cannot be termed as a sufficient cause for filing the appeal beyond the prescribed period of limitation.  For the reasons aforesaid the petition for condonation of delay is dismissed.  The appeal also stands dismissed as being barred by limitation.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. SHANKAR COARI]
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.