Today is fixed for passing necessary orders.

Both parties are present today.

The Opposite party has contested the case by filing a written statement. They raised preliminary objections dated 27/09/2024  that the present complaint  is not maintainable and deserves dismissal as the complainant  has suppressed material facts; that the complaint is liable to be rejected /dismissed.  In that petition the O.P submits that the complainant file the case against them by submitting that they have not paid the insurance claim reimbursement to the complainant. Against the version of the complainant the learned advocate of the O.P submits some documents which reflects that  an amount of Rs. 37,452/- was paid to the complainant vide NEFT having UTR no N130232454969636 dated 10.05.2023 out of total claim amount of Rs. 42,691/- as mention in the claim form by the complainant. 

The date of filing of this case is 19.07.2023 in the complainant petition the complainant never mentioned the upper mentioned fact. It is to be mentioned that on 24.01.2024 the complainant files a written objection against the maintainability petition. In paragraph 12 of this w.o the complainant stated that “the payment of Rs. 37,452/- by o.p-1 is not denied”. So, it is crystal clear that the complainant suppresses the material facts at the time of filing the case. Material facts are facts that are relevant to the issue at hand and can help the court interpret other facts and evaluate the subject matter. The law requires that parties come to court with clean hands and candid facts.

The Supreme Court of India has stated that concealing or suppressing material facts is not advocacy, but rather a form of misrepresentation, manipulation, or jugglery. The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has also ruled that manipulation, misrepresentation, or jugglery has no place in equitable and prerogative jurisdiction. 

“If there is suppression of material facts on the part of the petitioner or twisted facts have been placed before the Court, the writ Court may refuse to entertain the petition and dismiss it without entering into merits of the matter”

In the light of the above Judicial pronouncement of the Supreme Court of India and having regard to the fact that there is not only suppression of material facts by the complainant but also non disclosure of relevant facts.  However, when the complainant has not approached this commission with clean hands, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.

The prayer of the opposite party is considered and allowed.

Complainant case Number 48/2023 is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.