R.P.No.61/2010 against I.A.No.440/2010 IN  C.C.No.40/2010 , District Forum, Anantapur

Between:

SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD.,

Rep. by its Branch Manager, B.L.Complex,

Near Market, Gooty Road, Guntakal,

Anantapur District.                                                      Petitioner/

                                                                                       Opp.party

And

Y.Ranga Swamy S/o.Y.Sreeramulu

D.No.12-1-207, 1^st cross, Ashoknagar,

Anantapur.                                                                   Respondent/

                                                                                      Complainant.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.N.Subba Rao

Counsel for the Respondent- Mr.N.Aswartha Narayana.

 QUORUM:   THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT                                                           

AND

SMT.M.SHREESHA,  MEMBER

.                                                                 

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER,

TWO THOUSAND TEN

Oral order:(Per Hon’ble Justice Sri D.Appa Rao, President)
***

        The opposite party aggrieved by the order of the District Forum in I.A.No.440/2010 in C.C.No.40/2010 in dismissing the application to implead National Insurance Company filed this revision. 

The District Forum while dismissing the application held that it should be filed by the complainant and not by the opposite party and the provisions under Order 1 rule 10 CPC does not apply.

        The revision petitioner contends that the complainant claimed accidental death benefit, wherein the claim was covered by insurance policy which he himself mentioned in his complaint.  The question whether the insurance company is liable to pay or not could be determined in the main enquiry.  When one of the parties bring it to the notice of the District Forum, that one of the important parties was omitted, the District Forum ought to have ordered notice to the proposed party, hear the matter and dispose of it on merits.  The reason that was given by the District Forum does not stand legal scrutiny and there is no logic when they state that opposite party had no right to file the petition to implead third party.  It is not known from where such a proposition of law has been taken.   Considering the undisputed fact that there are insurance policies issued by the National Insurance Company, the District Forum ought to have issued notice to the proposed party and then disposed of the case on merits.  The District Forum cannot dismiss the petition on the ground that written version was not filed in the main complaint.  It is up to the District Forum to pass appropriate order with regard to non filing of counter and on that score, this application cannot be dismissed.

        In the result this revision petition is allowed and the order under revision is set aside.  The District Forum is directed to order notice to the proposed party and after hearing both the parties, dispose of the case on merits.  There shall be no order as to costs.

Sd/-PRESIDENT.

Sd/-MEMBER.

JM                                                                                                             Dt.23-11-2010