Maharashtra

StateCommission

EA/11/8

Nirmalaben Jaysukhlal Sheth - Complainant(s)

Versus

The New India Assurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

MR VINOD SOLANKI

28 Feb 2013

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
Execution Application No. EA/11/8
 
1. Nirmalaben Jaysukhlal Sheth
39, Matru Ashish, A-2, 7th floor, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai 400 006.
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. The New India Assurance Company Limited
Reg. & Head Off. at New India Assurance, Building 87, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE Mr.Justice S.B.Mhase PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Narendra Kawde MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. S.B.Sawarkar MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
Mr.Vinod Solanki –Advocate for the applicant/executant
......for the Appellant
 
Mr.A.S.Vidyarthi-Advocate for the non applicant/respondent
......for the Respondent
ORDER

Per Hon’ble Justice Mr.S.B.Mhase, President

          Heard Mr.Vinod Solanki –Advocate for the applicant/executant and  Mr.A.S.Vidyarthi-Advocate for the non applicant/respondent.

          This is an execution application filed the original complainant u/sec.27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against M/s.New India Assurance Co.Ltd. and Mr.I.S.Phukela, who was/is General Manager of M/s.New India Assurance Co.Ltd.  The consumer complaint no.334/1997 was filed by the complainant as against the opponent/accused. The said complaint was dismissed by the State Commission.  However, First Appeal no.347/2004 was preferred before the National Commission.  Said appeal was decided by order dated 28/02/2008.  National Commission allowed the said appeal and directed the Insurance Company to reimburse the amount of US $30654 to the insured. It is further directed that as the insured has not paid the said amount to the hospital, contending that the Insurance Company is required to pay.  Hence, it is directed that the Insurance Company shall pay an amount of US $30645 to M/s.Orlando Regional Healthcare System, Anesthesiologists of Central Florida, Medical Centre Radiology Group, Raymond Pierson MD PA M.D. as per the statement quoted above.

          In the body of the judgement National Commission has quoted following statement:-

1.  From Anesthesiologists of                                 US $  1700.00

     Central Florida as per statement

     Dated 05/08/1996

 

2.  Emergency Physical Service as                          US $    277.00

 

    Per statement dated 07/07/1996

 

3.  Orlando Regional Healthcare System

     As per statement dated 21/7/1996                      US $ 24816.00

 

 

4.  Medical Center Radiology Group

     As per statement dt.23/07/1996                         US $   209.00

 

 

5.  Dr.Raymond Pierson M.D. P.A.

     M.D. as per statement dt.31/07/1996                  US $  3652.00

                                                                             -----------------

                                                                            US $  30654.00

                                                                             ==========

          Even though this order was passed by the National Commission, it was not obeyed and the amounts were not sent to the respective Healthcare Centre.  Therefore, complainant invoked jurisdiction of this Commission u/sec.27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by filing this complaint. 

          During the pendency of this complaint, Insurance Company has sent those amounts.  In view of the order of the National Commission, Insurance Company has sent US $ 30654 to M/s.Orlando Regional Healthcare System. However, said hospital has accepted an amount of US $ 24816 and returned US $ 5838 to the Insurance Company.  This amount was returned by the said Healthcare Centre because the doctors to whom it was to be paid are not available and they have left the said Healthcare Centre.  Under these circumstances, complainant has filed the complaint contending that the order of the National Commission is not obeyed in toto and invoked the jurisdiction of this Commission.

          Now the question is what is to be done with US $ 5838 which are returned by the said Healthcare Centre.  In fact, contention of the complainant is that complainant has actually incurred the said expenditure and, therefore, Insurance Company is liable to reimburse the said amount to the complainant.  Complainant has further stated that actually this amount has been paid to the Healthcare Centre.  Now the complainant has taken a stand and filed an application that since it was directed by the National Commission that the amount should be sent to the Healthcare Centre, intention of the National Commission was to make this fund available to the hospital which has rendered services to the complainant.  The complainant further states that since said Healthcare Centre has returned this amount, complainant now desires that this amount instead of being given to the complainant be given to some Charitable Trust in India.  He has filed affidavit stating that the amount be paid to “Conwest & ManjulaShashikantBedaniHospital” at Kandawadi, Mumbai 400 004.

          Other side Insurance Company has given say on the application to the effect that New India Assurance Co. is ready to deposit US $ 5838 in Indian currency with the State Commission  at the present rate of exchange.  Opponents have further stated that they are depositing this amount so as to be paid to the complainant but however, they have no objection if the amount is disbursed as per desire of the complainant.  Under these circumstances and in view of the concession given on both the sides, we pass the following order:-

ORDER

M/s.New India Assurance Co.Ltd. is hereby directed to deposit the amount equivalent to US $5838 at the present exchange rate with the State Commission within a period of 4 weeks from today. On deposit of this amount, Registrar of the State Commission shall disburse this amount in favour of “Conwest & ManjulaShashikantBedaniHospital” at Kandawadi, Mumbai 400 004 with a further information to the Charity Commissioner of State of Maharashtra.  Said Trust is hereby directed to use this amount for the purpose of poor patients admitted in the said hospital.  Statement and account of the utilization of this amount shall be submitted by the said Trust to the State Commission and Charity Commissioner of State of Maharashtra.  In view of above complaint stands disposed of.

Pronounced on 28th February, 2013.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE Mr.Justice S.B.Mhase]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Narendra Kawde]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. S.B.Sawarkar]
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.