State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Divisional Manager,United India ... vs Gauri Mustafa Yunus S/O Gulam Hussain on 9 February, 2009
1 F.A.No. :138/08
Date of filing:08.02.2008
Date of order:09.02.2009
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MUMBAI, CIRCUIT BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
F.A. NO.: 138 OF 2008
IN COMPLAINT CASE NO. :124 OF 2006
DISTRICT FORUM : BEED.
Divisional Manager,
United India Insurance Co.Ltd.,
Divisional Office,
New Osmanpura, Aurangabad. ...APPELLANT
(Org.Opponent)
VERSUS
Gauri Mustafa Yunus S/o Gulam Hussain,
R/o Khandak, Karanja Road,
Beed. ... RESPONDENT
(Org.Complainant)
Coram : Shri.S.G.Deshmukh, Hon`ble Presiding Judicial
Member.
Mrs.Uma S.Bora, Hon`ble Member.
Present : Adv.Shri.A.P.Bagul for appellant, Adv.Shri.Sayyad for respondent.
O R A L O R D E R Per Shri.S.G.Deshmukh, Hon`ble Presiding Judicial Member.
1. The present appeal is filed by United India Insurance Co.Ltd. against the judgment and order dated 30.04.2007 in complaint case No. 124/2006 passed by District Forum,Beed.
2. Respondent/Complainant`s case before the Forum is that, his Qualis Vehicle bearing No.MH 23/E-2841 was insured with the appellant for the period from 10.09.2004 to 09.09.2005, accordingly premium was deposited. It is contended that, the vehicle was stolen on 7.6.2005 and 2 F.A.No. :138/08 complaint is lodged at Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad. It is contended that, vehicle was damaged and same was got repaired by the respondent. Accordingly, respondent preferred the claim for damages.
3. The claim was repudiated on the ground that, the vehicle was found given on hire basis and thus committed breach of condition. Appellant rightly repudiated the claim.
4. The Forum below after going through the papers and hearing the parties allowed the complaint and directed the appellant to pay Rs.35,000/- with interest @ 7% p.a. Forum also directed the appellant to pay Rs.35,000/- as he could not use the vehicle for the period.
5. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed by District Forum, Aurangabad, United India Insurance Co.Ltd. came in appeal. Appellant also filed application for condonation of delay.
6. Notice was issued to the respondent. Learned counsel Shri.S.S.Sayyad appeared on behalf of respondent. We heard learned counsel Shri.A.P.Bagul for appellant and learned counsel Shri.Sayyad for respondent. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that, they have received copy of order on 2.6.2007. He submitted that, after receipt of the order company had asked opinion of dealing advocate. The dealing advocate gave opinion and thereafter the dealing advocate communicated to the Regional Office and after getting the consent of Regional office the present appeal is filed. Delay caused is of 223 days. It is to be noted that no specific dates have been mentioned when papers were submitted to the Regional Office and when dealing advocate gave his opinion. In the absence of specific date it is difficult to hold time consumed for giving 3 F.A.No. :138/08 opinion and consent was just and proper. It also be mentioned that shuffling of papers from one office to another this can not be the ground of condoning the delay. We are not inclined to condone the delay. We pass the following order.
O R D E R
1. M.A.No.237/20087 for condonation of delay is dismissed.
2. Consequently, appeal stands dismissed.
3. Interim stay stands vacated. M.A.No.238/08 is disposed of.
4. No order as to cost.
5. Pronounced and dictated in the open court.
6. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.
Mrs.Uma S.Bora S.G.Deshmukh,
Member Presiding Judicial Member
Mane