IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC /148/2007.
Date of Filing: 13.09.2007. Date of Final Order: 09.12.2015.
Complainant: Sis Charan Mondal, S/O Late Ambujaksha Mondal, 103/1, B.B.Sen Road,
P.O.Khagra, P.S. Berhampore, Dist. Murshidabad.
Partner- M/S Mondal Agency, P.O. Jiaganj, Dist. Murshidabad.
-Vs-
Opposite Party: United India Insurance Co. Ltd, 3/20/1, K. K. Banerjee Road, P.O.&P.S. Berhampore, Dist. Murshidabad.
Present: Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya ………………….President.
Sri Samaresh Kumar Mitra ……………………..Member.
Smt. Pranati Ali ……….……………….……………. Member
FINAL ORDER
Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya, Presiding Member.
The instant complainant has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of C.P. Act, 1986 praying for payment of Rs.25,582.20 along with interest.
The complainant’s case, in brief, is that the complainant claimed Rs.25, 582.20 for loss in transit from the OP Bank in connection with Lalgola P.S. Case No. 24/90 dt. 30.01.90 u/s 395 I.P.C. and 25/27 Arms Act. After observing all the formalities as and when demanded by the OP, the complainant did not get the claim amount though the complainant represented before the OP but no result. Ultimately, the complainant filed a representation on 14.06.2007 before the OP but no result received. Then the complainant has filed this instant case. Hence, the complaint case.
The written version filed by the OP/United India Insurance Co. Ltd is that the OP has denied the allegation as to the loss of money for Rs.25, 582.20 in transit of the complainant. The alleged cause of action arose on 30.01.1990 but the complainant did not inform the same to the OP Company within the stipulated period of limitation and as such the complaint is barred by law of limitation. The complainant is to prove that he informed the alleged incident to the Insurance Company within the statutory period and that the alleged amount of Rs.25, 582.20 was in transit or that belonged to the complainant and also to prove that the complainant collected the said amount. The complainant did not collect such money. For wrongful gain the complainant has filed this case.
The complaint is liable to be rejected. Hence, the instant written version.
Considering the pleadings of both parties the following points have been framed for disposal of the case.
- Whether the complaint is maintainable or not?
- Whether the complaint is barred by law of limitation?
- Whether the complainant has any cause of action to file the present complaint?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
- To what other relief/reliefs the complainant may get?
Decision with Reasons.
Point Nos. 1 to 5.
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience
In this case the complainant has filed documents in support of his claim. Neither the complainant nor his Ld. Lawyer is present at the time of hearing.
Documents being filed by the complainant as per provisions of this Act without dismissing the case for default, the case has been taken up for disposal on merit.
The complainant’s main case is that on 30.01.1990 the complainant lost Rs.25, 582.20 in transit and for that Lalgola P.S. Case No. 24/90 dt. 30.01.90 u/s 395 IPC was lodged and charge sheet was filed on 02.02.1994. In this case no final report in respect of alleged loss of money in transit has been filed and also no document has been filed as to the decision of that criminal case relating to the alleged incident.
Relating to the barred by law of limitation , the complainant’s case is that he ultimately requested the OP on 14.06.2007 about of his claim and this case was filed on 09.10.2007 but the complainant has not filed any documents showing that he filed application before the OP for payment of his claim on 14.06.2007
Further there is no document filed by the complainant showing that he informed the alleged incident of loss of money in transit to the Insurance Company within the statutory period. The complainant has filed a letter dt. 18.03.1996 addressed to the OP/ Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd showing that on the date he submitted the Investigation Report.
For absence of cogent evidence as to the point for “barred by law of limitation” we have no other alternative but to conclude that the case is hopelessly barred by law of limitation.
Further for absence of cogent evidence as to FRT of the alleged criminal case relating to the incident of loss of money of Rs.25, 582.20 in transit and also for absence of any decision of the alleged criminal case and also for absence of any document showing intimation of the alleged incident to the OP/Insurance Company within the stipulated period, we have no other alternative but to decide on merit that the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
Considering the above discussions as a whole we can safely conclude that all the points are disposed of against the complainant. As such the complaint be dismissed on merit without cost.
Hence,
ORDERED
that the Consumer Case No. 148/2007 be and the same is hereby dismissed on merit .
There will be no order as to cost.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
