Maharashtra

StateCommission

MA/08/256

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, - Complainant(s)

Versus

SUSHAMA SANJEEV BUTALA, - Opp.Party(s)

-

11 Jan 2012

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
Miscellaneous Application No. MA/08/256
 
1. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER, MANGAON BRANCH OFFICE, 38, YASHODHAN, OPP. UNION BANK, AT POST MANGAON, DIST. RAIGAD.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. SUSHAMA SANJEEV BUTALA,
SOLE PROP. M/S DHANLAXMI TRADERS ROOM NO.15, JUNI PETH, MAHAD, TALUKA MAHAD, DIST. RAIGAD.
2. THE MANAGER,
THE GOREGAON ARBAN CO-OP. BANK LTD., MAHAD BR. AT POST MAHAD, DIST. RAIGAD.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode PRESIDING MEMBER
 Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kawde MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Ms.Pranoti Bhoir, Advocate, proxy for M/s.R. Bhargawan & Associates.
 Mr.Sameer Tendulkar, Advocate for the Respondent.
ORDER

Per Shri S.R. Khanzode – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member:

 

    There is a delay of 62 days in filing this appeal and there is an application for condonation of delay.  The delay is tried to be explained in paragraph no.3 of the application stating that the delay occurred since various levels officers involved in taking the decision to file appeal.  Ld.Counsel for the Non-Applicant/Respondent objected to condone the delay on the ground that the applicant failed to explain the delay in a satisfactory manner.

 

     In the instant case, the Applicant/Appellant has stated in the application that it is a public sector organization like Insurance Company and they have to take abundant caution before taking final decision.  It also mentioned the efforts made by the Applicant/Appellant soon after receipt of the certified copy of the order.  We find it reflects their due diligence and not latches.  In the circumstances, considering the fact that this is one of the nationalized General Insurance Company and the issues as to the maintainability of the claim substantially arises in the instant case and which goes to the root of the matter; the legality of the award passed could be well quantified.  Hence, we find it proper and just to condone the delay.  Thus, the order:

O  R  D  E  R

 

    (i)               Misc.Application no.256/2008 filed for condonation of delay is allowed.

 

  (ii)               Delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

 

(iii)               No order as to costs.

 

Pronounced on 11th January, 2012.

 

 
 
[Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kawde]
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.