Haryana

Karnal

CC/656/2021

Ram Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

United India Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Maninder Singh Rana

30 Nov 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                         Complaint No.656 of 2021

                                                          Date of instt. 25.11.2021

                                                          Date of Decision: 30.11.2021

 

Ram Kumar age about 45 years, son of Sh. Jeetu Ram, resident of Village and P.O. Staundi, Distt. Karnal.                                                                                                 …….Complainant

                                        Versus

 

1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Director, Regd. & Head Office-24, Whites Road, Chennai-600014.
2. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Manager, MO Kalayat, micro office, Opp. Kapil Muni Mahila College, Railway Road, Kalayat, Distt. Kaithal.
3. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Divisional Manager, Durga Bhawani Teple, Floor No.1, Old G.T.Road, near Old Bus Stand, Karnal.

 

                                                                …..Opposite parties.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before    Sh. Jaswant Singh………President. 

                Sh. Vineet Kaushik……… Member

 

Present: Sh. Maninder Singh, counsel for complainant.

               

                Complaint presented today.  It be checked and registered.

                Heard on the point of admissibility of complaint.  The complainant has mentioned in para No.6 of the complaint as under:-

                “That the son of complainant also informed his father i.e. complainant about the theft of the motor-cycle and also complainant informed you regarding the theft of the motor-cycle and also lodged a claim of theft with you and since then the complainant is in regular contact with you and also supplied you all the documents required by you but till now the claim of the complainant has not been settled by you.”

             From the above-said para, it is clear that the present complaint is not typed in proper format.  On query, ld. counsel for complainant has not satisfied this commission that why he has got typed such type of words in the complaint and hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed.

        However, the complainant is at liberty to file fresh case on the same cause of action after rectifying the words in the court of competent jurisdiction, if so desired. Parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

Announced
Dated: 30.11.2021           

 

                                                                                     President,     

District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Karnal.

(Vineet Kaushik)          

     Member