Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

CC/229/2017

Aadhi Cashews Foods, Rep by its Sole Proprietor, R.Aadhikesavan - Complainant(s)

Versus

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep by its Divisional Manager & anr - Opp.Party(s)

Mission legal advocates

03 Dec 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI – 600 003.

BEFORE         Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R.SUBBIAH                            PRESIDENT

                         Tmt. Dr. S. M. LATHA MAHESWARI                           MEMBER

 

C.C. No.229/2017

                         DATED THE 03^RD  DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

 

 

M/s. Aadhi Cashews Foods,

Rep. by its Sole Proprietor

Mr. R. Aadhikesavan,

No.1/417, East Street,

Yasodha Illam,

Nadukuppam,

Panruti Taluk,

Cuddalore District.                                                                             .. Complainant.

 

-Versus-

1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Tuticorin,

Rep. by its Divisional Manager.

 

2. Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd.,

Panruti,

Cuddalore District,

Rep. by its Branch Manager.                                                           .. Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for the complainant           : M/s. V. Shankar

Counsel for the 1^st opposite party   : M/s. S.P. Sankara Narayanan

Counsel for the 2^nd opposite party  : M/s. N.K.S. Rukmangathan

 

          This complaint is coming up before us on 03.12.2021 for appropriate order and this Commission made the following order in open court:                                                                                                

 

 

Docket order

 

             Counsel on record for the complainant present and filed a memo stating that he is withdrawing the complaint with liberty to file a fresh complaint before the concerned District Commission claiming actual loss suffered by him. Memo filed by the counsel for the complainant is perused and recorded.    

         Both sides heard and the records were also perused. On perusal of records, we find that the complainant is running a company in the name and style of “M/s. Aadhi Cashews Foods” carrying on a business of importing cashewnuts from African Countries in containers and export the same to the United Arabian Emirates and European Countries. During the course of business, the complainant’s Firm availed a financial assistance from the 2^nd opposite party bank and further the 2^nd opposite party provided insurance coverage of the 1^st opposite party insurance company for the complainant’s stock of cashewnuts for the period from 06.11.2015 to 05.11.2016. While the policy was in force, due to cyclonic flood, the stocks of cashewnuts were damaged subsequently the claim was made with the opposite parties. But, the said claim was repudiated by the opposite parties. Hence, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before this Commission against the opposite parties 1 & 2 claiming damages of Rs.80,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum towards the damaged and wasted cashew nuts stocks caused due to cyclonic flood on  09.11.2015.

      Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the counsel for the complainant filed a memo stating that though the complainant suffered a loss to the tune of Rs.4.25 crores he has restricted his claim to Rs.80,00,000/- in the present complaint. Further, it was submitted by the complainant that non-claiming of Rs.3.5 crores, the actual loss incurred, has put the complainant to great financial hardship and hence they are intending to file a fresh complaint before the concerned District Commission claiming actual loss incurred and therefore the complainant is withdrawing this present complaint with liberty to file a fresh complaint on the same cause of action before the concerned District Commission.

       The opposite parties have no serious objection to withdraw the complaint. However, the opposite parties sought for liberty to raise all the defense available to them in the event the complainant files a fresh complaint before the appropriate District Commission.  

     In view of the submissions made by both sides and the memo filed by the complainant, the complainant is permitted to withdraw the complaint with liberty to file a fresh complaint subject to limitation on the very same cause of action before the concerned District Commission. The opposite parties are also at liberty to raise a all the defense available to them including limitation and pecuniary jurisdiction, etc. in the event of complainant files a fresh complaint. 

        Accordingly, in view of the memo filed by the complainant, the complaint is permitted to be withdrawn with the above observations. 

        The memo filed by the complainants shall be a part and parcel of this order.  

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                 Sd/-                                                                                      Sd/-                                                                   

S.M.LATHAMAHESWARI                                                                            R.SUBBIAH                        

           MEMBER                                                                                           PRESIDENT