Rajasthan

StateCommission

A/1249/2015

Shriram Life Ins. Co. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Smt. Kamla Devi w/o Bheru Lal Khatil - Opp.Party(s)

Varun Chauhan

02 Nov 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 1249/2015

 

Shriram Life Insurance Company Ltd. Regd.office at Plot No. 31, 32 5^th floor, Ramky Selenium,Beside Andhra Bank Training Centre Financial District, Gachibowli, Hyderabad & ors.

 

Vs.

 

Smt.Kamla Devi w/o Late Sh.Bherulal Khatik r/o Potala Tehsil Shada Distt. Bhilwara (Raj.) & ors.

 

 

Date of Order 2.11.2015

 

Before:

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta- President

Mr. Kailash Soyal -Member

 

Mr. Chanderdeep Singh Jodha counsel for the appellant

 

2

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION ( PER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NISHA GUPTA,PRESIDENT):

 

The matter has came up on application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act. The appeal has been filed with an inordinate delay of 278 days. The contention of the appellant is that judgment was passed on 10.12.2014. Admittedly the appellants were represented before the court below through counsel.

 

The only contention of the appellant is that his counsel never intimated him about passing of the award and they came to know about the award only on intimation through execution notice on 17.8.2015.

 

It may be true that counsel for the appellant have not intimated about the passing of the award to the appellant but the counsel is agent of the appellant and the appellant is responsible for his action and conduct. It was also the duty of the appellant to monitor the case and to know about the stages of the case but for more than eight months he kept mum and none enquired from the counsel itself. There must be some one incharge of the case of the company but nothing has been brought on record and no affidavit of such authority has been submitted that he tried to

3

 

contact the counsel or whether he tried to made himself known about the proceedings of the case. Hence, nothing has been explained in the application and the application is very cursory and casual and nothing has been shown to explain the delay.

 

Hence, the appliation is dismissed so also the appeal.

 

 

(Kailash Soyal) (Nisha Gupta )

Member President

 

nm