STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                               UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW

                                  REVISION NO. 116 OF 2016

                (Against the order dated 02-08-2016  in Complaint Case No.

                         09/2016 of the District Consumer Forum, Jalaun )

1. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

Branch Auraiya

2. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

Branch Orai

3. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

H.O. G.E. Plaza, Airport Road

Yarwada, Pune-411006

Through its Appropriate Authority

                                                                                          ...Revisionists

                                                     Vs.

Smt. Shila Devi

W/o Late Anirudh Singh

R/o 730, Naya Rajendra Nagar

Orai                                                                                    ...Opposite party

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTER HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

HON’BLE MRS. BAL KUMARI, MEMBER

For the Revisionist          :   Sri Sanjeev Bahadur Srivastava, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party    :                    -

Dated : 05-09-2016

                                                  JUDGMENT

       MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT (ORAL)

Present revision has been filed under Section 17(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against order dated 02-08-2016 passed by District Consumer Forum, Jalaun in complaint No.09/2016, Smt. Sheela Devi V/s Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited and others whereby District Consumer Forum has rejected application moved by revisionist for recalling exparte order.

Learned Counsel Mr. Sanjeev Bahadur Srivastava appeared for revisionist.

We have heard learned Counsel for the revisionist and perused impugned order passed by District Consumer Forum, Jalaun.

Vide impugned order the District Consumer Forum has rejected application moved by revisionist for recalling exparte order.

:2:

In view of principle laid down by Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Rajeev Hitendra Pathak and others V/s Achyut Kashi Nath Karekak and another reported in IV(2011) CPJ 35(SC) as well as provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, it is apparent that under Consumer Protection Act the District Consumer Forum or State Commission has no power to recall its earlier order.

Considering the proposition laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in above case as well as provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, the impugned order passed by District Consumer Forum cannot be said to be against law.

However, in view of proposition laid down by Hon’ble National Commission in first Appeal No. 257/2016 Rudra Buildwell Constructions Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Dharampal, the appellant is at liberty to move application before District Consumer Forum and District Consumer Forum shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

In view of above, revision is dismissed with liberty to revisionist to move application before District Consumer Forum and if such application is moved before District Consumer Forum, the District Consumer Forum shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law keeping in view the proposition laid down by Hon’ble National Commission in the case of Rudra Buildwell Construction Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Dharampal.

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.

( JUSTICE A H KHAN )

                                                                                                             PRESIDENT

                                                                                            ( SMT. BAL KUMARI )

                        MEMBER

            Pnt.