Haryana

StateCommission

RP/17/2024

UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD - Complainant(s)

Versus

SIMRANJEET SINGH - Opp.Party(s)

RAJNEESH MALHOTRA

11 Mar 2024

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

 

 

                                              Date of the Institution: 04.03.2024

                                                Date of final hearing: 11.03.2024

                                                          Date of Pronouncement: 11.03.2024

 

Revision Petition No.17 of 2024

 

1.      Universal Sompo General Insurance Company Limited, Office 103, 1^st Floor, Ackruti Star, MIDC Central Road, Andheri East, Mumbai, 400093, Maharashtra, through its authorized Signatory, Managing Director.

2.      Chief Grievance Redressal Officer, Grievance Cell, Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd., Unit No.601 and 602, 6^th floor, Reliable Teck Park, Cloud City Campus, Gut No.31, Thane Belapur Road, Airoli, Navi Mumabi, 400708, Maharashtra.                       

 

3.      Universal Sompo General Insurance Company Ltd., Zonal Office, SCO 9, First Floor, Above Central Bank of India, Sector 10, Panchkula, 134109, Haryana, through its Regional Manager.

                                     

.….Petitioners

 

Versus

1.      Simranjeet Singh aged 35 years son of
Shri Gurpal Singh, resident of H. No.3503, Hassanpur, Post Office Naggal, Tehsil and District Ambala, 133001, Haryana.

 

2.      Modern Automobiles, Near Model Town Crossing, Grand Trunk Road, Model Town, Ambala city, 133001, Haryana, through its Manager, Authorized Signatory.

                                                                                      .….Respondents

CORAM:      Mr. Naresh Katyal, Judicial Member.

                   Ms. Manjula, Member.

                  

Present:-     Mr. Rajneesh Malhotra, counsel for the revisionist.

                              

 

                  

                                                O R D E R

 

 

PER: NARESH KATYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

 

 

                   There is a delay of 19 days in filing of present revision petition, for which an application to condone the same has been filed and it is supported by an affidavit. In the interest of justice, application is allowed for the reasons stated in the application and delay of 19 days in filing of this revision petition stand condoned. Application for condonation of delay is disposed of accordingly.

2.                Challenge in the revision petition is invited to the legality of order dated 14.11.2023, by which revisionist/insurer has been proceeded against ex parte. As per status of the case filed along with this revision petition; next date in complaint case before Ld. District Consumer Commission is 21.03.2024. Learned counsel for the revisionist has urged that: though the process of against revisionist were served through registered post, but necessary instructions were floated late to Advocate Sh. Mohinder Bindal, who was to appear on behalf of Insurance Company on relevant date i.e. 14.11.2023. On account of this fact; there was no representation on behalf of insurer before the Ld. District Consumer Commission which led to passing of ex parte order dated 14.11.2023 by Ld. District Consumer Commission, against insurer/revisionist.

3.                It is settled principle of law that no party should be condemned unheard and case should be decided on merits, de hors technical considerations. Keeping in view the nature of grounds taken in this revision petition and the quality of contention raised before us; we are of the firm view that this revision petition can be disposed of, without issuing notice to respondent/complainant, with a view to impart substantive justice to the parties and to save huge expenses incurred by parties and also to avoid unnecessary delay in adjudication of the matter. In this regard; this Commission relies upon ratio of law laid down by Hon’ble high Court in case Batala Machine Tools Workshop Cooperative Versus Presiding Officr, Labour court, Gurdaspur (CWP No.9563 of 2002) decided on June 27, 2002.

4.                Even otherwise, it is well settled legal adage that in the process of justice dispensation every litigant has right to put forward his/her/its case, so that lis be disposed of effectively on hearing all parties. It is also settled law that; while proceeding ex parte; the Court is required to borne in mind, as to whether, there is any intentional misconduct, accentuated by ulterior motives, on the part of any litigant by not appearing before it. In this case in hand, no such intentional misconduct or malafide intention, on the part of insurer is deciphered. This being so, the impugned order dated 14.11.2023 is hereby set aside. Consequently, this revision petition stands allowed in limine. Insurer/revisionist would now appear before the Learned District Consumer Commission Ambala, through its counsel on date fixed i.e. 21.03.2024 and would file its written statement on same day. This would however be subject to payment of Rs.7,000/- as costs to be by insurer/revisionist to the complainant. File be consigned to the records.

 

5.                Let, original documents be returned to the parties after getting photocopies of that documents from them against proper receipt and as per rules, after noting down in the registered, if maintained.

6.                Application(s), pending, if any, stand disposed off accordingly in terms of this order.

7.                File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this order.

 

Pronounced on 11^th March, 2024  

 

HG

                                                           

                                                            Manjula                                 Naresh Katyal                                                                           Member                                 Judicial Member

                                                            Addl. Bench-I                       Addl. Bench-I