Per Mr.Dhanraj Khamatkar, Hon’ble Member
This appeal takes an exception to an order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nasik dated 17/08/2010 in consumer complaint no.202/2009. Facts leading to this appeal can be summarized as under;
The Government of Maharashtra had taken a Janata Personal Accident policy from the appellant. The farmers from the State are covered by the said policy and the policy is valid for a period from 10/04/2005 to 09/04/2006. One Mr.Kacharu Khandu Thete died accidentally on 06/05/2005. He being the agriculturist, his legal heirs i.e. present respondents had filed the claim along with all the documents with the Tahsildar Dindori on 27/07/2005. The opponent/present appellant had repudiated the claim on 21/10/2005 on the ground that as per the policy conditions the claim is to be filed within a period of 60 days from the date of incidence, however, the claim is filed after 91 days from the incidence. As the appellant/original opponent repudiated the claim, original complainants/respondents have filed the consumer complaint.
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum after hearing both the parties has passed an order dated 17/08/2010 directing the appellant/original opponent to pay an amount of `1 lakh along with interest @ 12% p.a. from 01/10/2005, `5,000/- for mental agony and `1,000/- as cost. It is against this order that the present appeal is filed.
Ld.counsel Mr.Mehta appeared for the appellant and argued that there was a delay in filing the consumer complaint before the forum and District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nasik without hearing the appellant/original opponent registered the complaint. On perusal of the papers, it revealed that the complaint is filed along with delay condonation application and the forum after hearing the complainant has condoned the delay. Said order is not challenged by the appellant and hence the appellant cannot challenge the same in appeal, as the order of the forum has achieved the finality.
Further the Ld.counsel had contended that the appellant/org.opponent had appointed a surveyor for the investigation into the cause of the death of the deceased and the investigator has submitted the report that the deceased was under the influence of alcohol and hence they have repudiated the claim. However, appellant has not filed any affidavit of the investigator and in absence of the affidavit of the investigator, investigation report has no evidentiary value. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case has passed the order and we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. We hold accordingly and pass the following order:-
ORDER
Appeal is dismissed.
Order of the forum is hereby confirmed.
No order as to costs.
Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
Pronounced on 13th June, 2011.
