NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/1819/2014

SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

VISHAL KUMAR & 2 ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

MS. GITANJALI KAPUR

13 Apr 2022

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 1819 OF 2014
 
(Against the Order dated 04/02/2014 in Appeal No. 319/2013 of the State Commission Chhattisgarh)
1. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.
DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT E-8 EPIP,RIICO SITAPURA,
JAIPUR
RAJASTHAN
2. BRANCH MANMAGER, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD.,
REP THROUGH THEIR CONSTITUENT ATTORNEY
DISTRICT : KORBA
C.G
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. VISHAL KUMAR & 2 ORS.
S/O SH.SARJU SINGH, R/O B-1/52 GAURN COLONY, GEWRA, TEHSIL KATGHORA,
DISTRICT : KORBA
C.G
2. NITIN VIJAY , SURVEYOR , SHRI RAM GENEAL INSURANCE CO LTD.
R/O NEAR RESIDENCE OF DR.SURJIT SINGH NIHARIKA AREA,
KORBA
C.G
3. BRANCH MANAGER, MAHINDRA AUTO CENTRE,
T.P NAGAR, KORBA ,
DISTRICT : KORBA
C.G
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. DINESH SINGH,PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE,MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Ms. Deeksha, proxy counsel for
Ms. Gitanjali Kapur, Advocate
For the Respondent :
For the Respondent No.1 : Mohd. Anis Ur Rehman, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2 : Ex-parte (vide Order dated 07.12.2016)
For the Respondent No.3 : Mr. Sanjay Garg, Advocate

Dated : 13 Apr 2022
ORDER

1.  These cross revision petitions no. 1779 of 2014 and no. 1819 of 2014 have been filed in challenge to the Order dated 04.02.2014 of the State Commission in appeal no. 319 of 2013 arising out of the Order dated 30.03.2013 of the District Commission in complaint no. 40 of 2012.

2.  The learned counsel for the complainant i.e. the petitioner in petition no. 1779 of 2014 and the respondent no. 1 in petition no. 1819 of 2014 submits on instructions that the matter has been amicably and voluntarily settled between the insurance company i.e. the respondents no. 1 & no. 2 in petition no. 1779 of 2014 and the petitioners in petition no. 1819 of 2014 on the terms that the insurance company will pay a lumpsum amount of Rs. 1,81,932/- to the complainant within four weeks.

The learned proxy counsel for the insurance company apprises that she has instructions to make submission. She then submits that the matter has been amicably and voluntarily settled between the complainant and the insurance company on the terms that the insurance company will pay a lumpsum amount of Rs. 1,81,932/- to the complainant within four weeks.

Both counsel further submit that they do not want to press their respective petitions.

The learned proxy counsel for the insurance company furthermore submits on instructions that the amount deposited with the District Commission in compliance of this Commission’s Order dated 28.04.2014 in petition no. 1819 of 2014 along with interest if any accrued thereon may be unconditionally and forthwith released by the District Commission to the complainant and that the balance of the settled lumpsum amount after adjustment of the amount so released by the District Commission will be paid by the insurance company to the complainant within four weeks.

3.  In the wake of the above submissions made on respective instructions the revision petitions no. 1779 of 2014 and no. 1819 of 2014 are disposed of with directions as below:

(i) The amount if any deposited by the insurance company in compliance of this Commission’s Order dated 28.04.2014 in petition no. 1819 of 2014 along with interest if any accrued thereon shall be unconditionally and forthwith released by the District Commission to the complainant (Vishal Kumar) by way of ‘payee’s a/c only’ demand draft as per the due procedure and after the due verification.

(ii) The balance of the settled lumpsum amount after adjustment of the amount so released by the District Commission shall be paid by the insurance company to the complainant (Vishal Kumar) by way of ‘payee’s a/c only’ demand draft within four weeks from today.

 (iii) Liberty is provided to the complainant i.e. the petitioner in petition no. 1779 of 2014 to revive his petition if he so wishes by filing appropriate application within thirty days from today.

4.  This Order has been passed on consent, with both counsel submitting that the matter has been amicably and voluntarily settled between the two sides. As such this case shall not be treated as a precedent. It is also made explicit that this Commission has no comments on the terms of the settlement arrived at by the two sides amongst themselves.

5.       The Registry is requested to send a copy each of this Order to the parties in this petition and to their learned counsel as well as to the District Commission immediately. The stenographer is also requested to upload this Order on the website of this Commission immediately.         

 
......................
DINESH SINGH
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................J
KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE
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.