Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Balaram vs The New India Assurance Company Limited on 20 June, 2005

BEFORE THE KARNAT AKA STATE CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
BANGALORE

Dated, the 20th day of June, 2005
PRESENT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRASHEKARAIAH,
PRESIDENT,

SMT. RAMA ANANTH, MEMBER 8:.

SR1 J .N.SRINIVASA MURTHY, MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 1455/2008

Sri BALARAM, Son of Mannar Swamy, Aged about 54 years, Residing at 891' Cross, Bapuji Nagar, Shimoga -- 577 00 1 APPELLANT (By Sri Varadaraj R.HaVa1dar and another, Advocates) VERSUS THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, Represented by the Senior Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, Post Box No. 143, Mallappa Complex, B.H.Road, Shimoga -- 577 201 RESPONDENT Hon'b1e Mr.Justice Chandrashekaraiah:

This Appeal is by the Complainant challenging the Order of the District Forum dismissing the Complaint.

2. The Complainant is the owner of the vehicle, which met with an accident on 22.10.1999. The said vehicle was insured with the Opposite Party (OP). The policy was in force as on the date of the accident. Immediately after the accident, the Complainant made a claim before the Insurance Company for claiming compensation. The said claim was repudiated by the OP on 24.1.2000 and it was served on the Complainant on 27.1.2000.

3. The Complaint filed by the Complainant was dismissed by the District Forum on the ground that as per the conditions of the Policy, any claim could be made before the competent court within 12 calendar months and as the said L/' Complaint was filed beyond 12 months, the Complaint 7/ mtefi barred by time.

4. Under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, any Complaint is required to be filed within two years from the date of the cause of action. In the instant case, the cause of action is the date of repudiation, i.e., 24.1.2000. The Complaint has been filed on 3.10.2001, i.e., well within the period of limitation. If that is so, in our view, the District Forum is not right in dismissing the Complaint on the ground of delay, since the Complaint has been filed well within the period of two years as provided under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.

5. Hence, We pass the following Order:

(1) The Appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside.
(2) The matter is remitted back to the District Forum to dispose of the same afresh on merits after due notice to the parties.

MEMBER PRESIDENT