A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

 ATHYDERABAD.

F.A. 105/2006 against C.D. 10/2005 , Dist. Forum, Adilabad 

Between:

Smt. Rathod Vijayalaxmi

W/o. Late Rathod Gundaji

Age: 31 years,

Govt. Employee,

R/o. Narayanpur village

Post: Dhannoor

Boath Mandal,

Adilabad Dist.1. United India Insurance Company Ltd.,

Rep. by its Divisional Manager

Divisional Office, 1454,WrightTown

Jabalpur Dist., Madhya Pradesh

2. United India Insurance Company Ltd.,

Rep. by its Branch Manager

Branch Office, Adilabad                                                                                               

Counsel for the Appellant:                         

Counsel for the Respondent:                     

QUORUM:

MONDAY, THE

Oral Order: (Per Hon’ble Justice D. Appa Rao, President)

           ppellant is the unsuccessful complainant. 

           Narayanpur village, Boath mandal of       

poisonous snake        

Despite informing the said fact and furnishing all these documents, the insurance company failed to pay the death benefits and on that she gave legal notice    

             while holding that it was barred by limitation and that she was entitled to the policy amount. 

                 We may also mention herein that the complainant had categorically stated that    on       choose to contradict the averments       

Before considering the question of limitation, the question of territorial jurisdiction of the Dist. Forum     Jabalpur.                                   

The       

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in   

“Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides that neither the District Forum nor the State Commission nor the National Commission shall admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. The term “cause of action” is of wide import and has different meanings in different contexts, that is when used in the context of territorial jurisdiction or limitation or the accrual of right to sue. It refers to all circumstances or bundle of facts which if proved or admitted entitles the plaintiff (complainant) to the relief prayed for. In the context of limitation 

               seven months of issuance of notice, she did not file an application  

We may state that when the respondent did not choose to express anything in regard to non-payment of amount covered under the policy, despite receipt of legal notices the limitation starts from the date of   

In the decision of the Supreme Court relied above, that was a case where          Supreme Court and