State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
M/S The New India Assu.Co. Ltd. vs M/S Forech India Ltd. on 19 January, 2017
Daily Order IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Arguments : 19.01.2017 Date of Decision : 23.01.2017 Appeal No. 155/2016 (Arising out of the order dated 25.08.2015 passed in Complaint Case No.861/2009 by the District Consumer Redressal Forum-II Delhi.) In the matter of: M/s. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., R-7A, Green Park, New Delhi. .........Appellant Versus M/s. Forech India Ltd. S-23, Green Park Extension, New Delhi-110006. ........ Respondent CORAM O. P. Gupta, Member (Judicial) 1.
Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes/No O.P. Gupta, Member (Judicial) The OP has come in the present appeal against order dated 25.08.2015 vide which the complaint of the respondent was allowed and appellant was directed to pay Rs. 15,67,428/- towards replacement of 'Steel Band' of the Roto Cure Machine. The machine was insured for Rs.16 lacs, Rs.1 lac has been granted as compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs.5500/- has been granted as legal cost.
It was directed that appellant should have complied with the order within 30 days from receipt of copy of order failing which it was liable to pay interest also @7% per annum w.e.f. 07.11.2008 / date of filing complaint in District Forum till date of realisation.
Appeal has been filed on 1103.2016. There is delay of 179 days in filing appeal. Appellant has moved application for condonation of delay on the plea that after payment of principal amount, file was inadvertently kept in settled files. It was after receipt of notice of execution that steps were taken for filing appeal. Law regarding condonation of delay is very liberal. Merits of case cannot be ignored while deciding application for condonation. The application is allowed.
Undisputedly, the appellant has made the payment of amount awarded towards claim and compensation as well as legal cost. The order was passed on 25.08.2015, copy was received by the appellant on 14.09.2015, it made the payment on 09.11.2015. The payment should have been made by 14.10.2015. There is delay of about 25 days in making the payment.
Now the respondent wants that he should get interest from 07.11.2008 till date of payment. The counsel for appellant submitted that it would be from harsh on the appellant to direct him to pay interest for eight years just for delay of 25 days in making the payment. According to him, the appellant bonafidely wanted to comply with the order but since it impersonal entity, file was to be reached from one officer to other officer for approval.
Submissions made by the counsel for appellant appear to be justified. What appears to be reasonable is to make the appellant liable for paying interest for a period of delay i.e. one month. Interest for that period calculated even @12% per annum would come to Rs.15,000/- only.
To sum up, it is directed that appellant would pay Rs.15,000/- as interest for delayed period of payment, within one month from receipt of copy of this order. With that impugned order would stand satisfied.
Copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost. One copy be sent to the District Forum for information.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(O.P. Gupta) Member (Judicial)