This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 19/11/2012 passed by the learned District Consumer Forum, Dimapur in Case No. 9/2011. By this impugned judgment the Forum has dismissed the case of the appellant and the claimant is directed to approach Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. In other words the Forum has taken a view that the claim case is not maintainable under Consumer Protection Act. Being agreed with this order the claimant has filed the instant appeal.

 Heard Shri  Bendang the learned counsel for the appellant and Shri. B Devnath, the learned counsel from the Insurance Company. We have also perused the impugned judgment.

Briefly stated the complainant is the owner cum Driver of vehicle bearing No. NL.07/7147 (Maruti Swift).The appellant met with an accident on 26/06/2007. After taking medical treatment for few months the appellant filed a case before MACT in the year 2008, which was registered as MACT Case No. 150/2008. The said case was closed Vide Order dated 16/12/2008 on the ground that the claim has to be decided by the Insurance Company as per the terms of the policy.

 After the aforesaid order the appellant approached to the Insurance Company on 17/12/2008. However, the Insurance Company did not settle the claim for about eight months. There after the appellant filed a claim case before the District Forum, Dimapur, being CFD Case No. 9/2009. This case was also disposed off on 10/06/2011 directing the Insurance Company to settle the matter with a period of two months. However, this direction was also not followed by the Insurance Company. Then the appellant filed another complaint before the same District Forum in the year 2011. This case was registered as CFD Case No. 09/2011.  Inadvertently, in the impugned judgment the District Forum has reflected execution Case No 09/2011. The second case has also been closed by the District Forum vide impugned judgment dated 19/11/2012 holding that the case is not maintainable and the complainant has been directed to approach the MAC Tribunal.

During the course of hearing Shri. B Devnath, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, submitted that MAC Tribunal can entertain claim cases involving only third parties. In other words the learned counsel is also of the view that since the claim case is arising out of a contractual liability in between 1st party and 2nd party the MAC Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide the dispute.

After going through the terms of the Policy we are also of the view that the District Consumer Forum is competent to decide the claim application in view of Sec III of the Insurance Policy. Besides this, the view taken by the District Forum in the impugned judgment dated 19/11/2012 is contrary to the view taken by the District Forum in CFD Case No. 9/2009. In the earlier case the Forum did not take any view that it has no jurisdiction to decide the case.

For the foregoing  reasons the impugned judgment is hereby set aside. The District Forum, Dimapur is directed to decide CFD Case No 9/2011 afresh in accordance with law.

Return the LCR with a copy of this judgment to the District Forum.