State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Universal Sompo General Insurance ... vs Smt. Rekha Lohiya on 29 November, 2018
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND
DEHRADUN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 230 / 2015
Universal Sompo General Insurance Company Limited
through its Authorised Signatory
KLS Tower, Plot No. 94
MIDC Mahape, Navi Mumbai
Maharashtra - 400710
...... Appellant / Opposite Party
Versus
Smt. Rekha Lohiya W/o Sh. Lokesh Lohiya
R/o through Afine Steel Pvt. Ltd.
Plot No. 98, Sector-1
Sidcul, Haridwar - 247656
...... Respondent / Complainant
Sh. Suresh Gautam, Learned Counsel for the Appellant
Sh. Deepak Ahluwalia, Learned Counsel for Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.S. Verma, President
Mr. Balveer Prasad, H.J.S., Member
Mrs. Veena Sharma, Member
Dated: 29/11/2018
ORDER
(Per: Justice B.S. Verma, President):
This appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is directed against the order dated 24.07.2014 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 503 of 2013.
2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the appeal are that the respondent - complainant is the registered owner of vehicle No. UK08-W-9897, which was insured with the appellant - opposite party for the period from 24.12.2012 to 23.12.2013 at an IDV of Rs. 20,23,000/-. The insured vehicle met with an accident on 18.02.2013 at 8:30 a.m. with roadways bus No. UP21-AN-1785. In 2 the said accident, the insured vehicle got completely damaged. At the time of the accident, the insured vehicle was being driven by the complainant's driver Sh. Ravi Kumar, who was possessing a valid and effective driving licence. The intimation of the accident was given to the insurance company, who in turn, appointed surveyor. The surveyor of the insurance company inspected the accidented vehicle and found the same completely damaged. The complainant completed all the required formalities of the insurance company. The insurance company, however, did not settle the claim of the complainant. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the insurance company, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Haridwar.
3. The District Forum issued notice to the appellant, but the appellant did not turn up before the District Forum and, consequently, the District Forum vide order dated 23.01.2014 proceeded the consumer complaint ex-parte against the appellant.
4. The District Forum, after perusal of the record, allowed the consumer complaint vide impugned order dated 24.07.2014 and directed the appellant to pay compensation of Rs. 19,00,000/- to the respondent - complainant within a period of one month from the date of the order. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant - insurance company has preferred this appeal.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. It appears from the impugned judgment and order that before the District Forum, the consumer complaint proceeded ex-parte against the appellant. The appellant did not file any written statement before the District Forum against the consumer complaint filed by the respondent - complainant. It is a settled principle of law 3 that all the parties involved in the matter in question should get proper opportunity of being heard.
6. We have noticed that the appellant could not file written statement before the District Forum and the District Forum did not give opportunity to the appellant for adducing evidence on affidavit and disposed of the consumer complaint merely on the basis of the pleadings of the complainant only, which is contrary to the principle of natural justice. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Topline Shoes Ltd. Vs. Corporation Bank; II (2002) CPJ 7 (SC), has observed that "it is for the Forum or the Commission to consider all facts and circumstances along with the provisions of the Act providing time frame to file reply, as a guideline, and then to exercise its discretion as best it may serve the ends of justice and achieve the object of speedy disposal of such cases keeping in mind the principle of natural justice as well."
7. Thus, we are of the view that the consumer complaint should be decided on its own merit. Therefore, we set aside the impugned ex-parte judgment and order dated 24.07.2014 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar and remand back the matter to the District Forum to decide the consumer complaint on its own merit. The appellant shall file the written statement before the District Forum on or before 28.12.2018, the date fixed for appearance of the parties before the District Forum and thereafter the District Forum shall afford a reasonable opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence in support of their case. The District Forum shall take all sort of endeavour to decide the consumer complaint as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months' from the date of filing the written statement by the appellant.
48. With the aforesaid directions, appeal is allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 24.07.2014 passed by the District Forum is set aside. Copy of the order be sent to the District Forum, Haridwar immediately. The statutory amount of Rs. 25,000/- deposited by the appellant at the time of filing the appeal, be released in its favour. The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on 28.12.2018. No order as to costs.
(MRS. VEENA SHARMA) (BALVEER PRASAD) (JUSTICE B.S. VERMA) K