Haryana

Panipat

CC/289/2022

ARUN KUMAR JAIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Ajay Kumar Singla

27 Feb 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
PANIPAT
 
Complaint Case No. CC/289/2022
( Date of Filing : 10 Oct 2022 )
 
1. ARUN KUMAR JAIN
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS SON OF SH. RAJINDER KUMAR JAIN, RESIDENT OF H.NO.D1-5573, ANSAL SUSHANT CITY PANIPAT-132103.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
Plot No. EL-94, KLS Tower, TTC Industrial Area, MIDC, Mahape, Navi Mumbai 400710 through its authorised Director/ Signatory.
2. ERICSON INSURANCE TPA LTD.
11-C, 2nd FLOOR, CORPORATE PARK, SION TROMBAY ROAD CHAMBUR- MUMBAI -71 through its authorised Director/Signatory.
3. JAIN INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION
1, Guru Ravi Das Marg, Block 59, Karol Bagh, Delhi, 110005.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Dr. R. K. Dogra PRESIDENT
  Dr. Rekha Chaudhary MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
Shri Ajay Kumar Singla, Advocate for complainant.
......for the Complainant
 
Shri Nitish Kumar Wadhwa, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Opposite parties No.2 and 3 ex parte vide order dated 30.11.2022.
......for the Opp. Party
Dated : 27 Feb 2024
Final Order / Judgement

No evidence of complainant is present. A date is requested on behalf of the complainant, which is opposed. Heard. This case is continuing for evidence of the complainant from 02.05.2023 and today is last opportunity. But no efforts has been made by the complainant to produce the evidence. Moreso, the complainant has already availed five effective opportunities including last opportunity. Hence, there are no sufficient grounds for adjourning this case for the purpose of the evidence of the complainant. Hence, the evidence of the complainant is hereby closed by order of this Commission.

 2.               This complaint has been filed against the respondents seeking claim alongwith compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- as the claim of the complainant has not been given by the respondents. In written statement, all the allegations have been denied by the opposite parties and dismissal of the complaint was prayed for.

3.                As the complainant has come before this Commission for seeking relief, the onus was on the complainant to prove his case by adducing cogent and convincing evidence. Since the complainant has not produced any evidence on record despite several effective opportunities as stated above and hence, there is no iota of evidence on record to substantiate the allegations of the complaint. Hence, the present complaint is hereby dismissed in lacking of evidence. However, both the parties are left to bear their own costs.

4.                This order be communicated to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record-room.

 
 
[ Dr. R. K. Dogra]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Dr. Rekha Chaudhary]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.