State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Branch Manager, Royal Sundaram ... vs Mr.,Manikkam, S/O Chellappan on 25 August, 2023
Daily Order IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI. Present: Hon'ble THIRU JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH : PRESIDENT F.A. No.637/2023 (Against the Order made in C.C.No.07/2021, dated:13.07.2022 on the file of the D.C.D.R.C., Perambalur) DATED THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 1. The Branch Manager, Royal Sundaram General Insurance Co. Ltd., ATP Tower, 5th Floor, No.12-A, Bypass Road, Madurai - 1. 2. The Branch Manager, Royal Sundaram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Corporate Claims Department, Visranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai (OMR), Karapakkam, Chennai - 600 097. .. Appellants / Opposite parties 1 & 2. -Versus- Mr. Manikkam, S/o. Mr. Chellappan, No.1/42, Nadutheru, Chithali Village, Kunnam Taluk, Perambalur District. .. Respondent / Complainant. Counsel for the Appellants / Opposite parties 1 & 2 : M/s. M.B. Gopalan Associates Counsel for the Respondent / Complainant : Served called absent The respondent as complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite parties praying for certain directions. The District Commission had passed an ex-parte order, allowing the complaint. Against the said ex-parte order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite parties praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt. 13.07.2022 in C.C. No.07/2021. This appeal came before me for hearing finally, today and upon hearing the arguments of the Appellant, perusing the documents, lower court records and the order passed by the District Commission, this Commission made the following order in the open court. ORDER
R. SUBBIAH J., PRESIDENT
1. The opposite parties before the District Commission is the appellants herein.
2. The case of the complainant before the District Commission is that he took insurance policy for Rs.14,00,000/- with the 1st opposite party for the Dipper Lorry Model 2011 for the period from 27.08.2015 to 26.08.2016. The policy premium is of Rs.44,988/-. The complainant was paying the policy premium regularly. On 21.02.2016, the lorry driver namely; Mr. Raja was admitted as an in-patient due to chest pain in the Ariyalur Government hospital. Before getting admitted in the hospital, the lorry was parked in the area called Kollapuram. On 22.02.2016, when the complainant's driver discharged from the hospital, he was shocked to see that the said vehicle was missing. Immediately, a police complaint for the theft of the vehicle had been given by the complainant and FIR No.63/2016 was registered by the Police Authorities. Further, a claim form was submitted for claiming the insurance amount. The opposite parties had repudiated the claim. Even after repeated requests, the opposite parties have not come forward to comply with the demands of the complainant. The act of the opposite parties caused great mental agony. Therefore, the complainant sent legal notice dt.20.02.2021 to the opposite parties for which, the opposite parties did not send any reply. Thus, alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant has filed the complaint before the District Commission claiming a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony to the complainant and cost of Rs.2,00,000/-.
3. Though notice has been served on the opposite parties, they have not chosen to appear before the District Commission and hence, the opposite parties were set exparte. Consequently, the District Commission passed an ex-parte order by directing the opposite parties 1 & 2 to pay a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and cost of Rs.10,000/-. The above amounts should be paid within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order failing which, the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a.
4. Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite parties 1 & 2 praying for setting aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merits.
5. Before this Commission, the counsel for the appellants / opposite parties submitted that there is no deficiency of service on their part. Further, the Counsel for the appellants / opposite parties submitted that since there was change of officials in handling the legal proceedings, the relevant papers were mixed up with other files and the same could not be traced out immediately. Hence, the appellants / opposite parties were not able to represent before the District Commission and as such they were set exparte. Hence, they prayed this Commission to set aside the order of the District Commission and prayed for an opportunity to contest the case on merits.
5. When the case had come up before this Commission on 10.08.2023, after hearing the submission of the appellants, this Commission had felt that there is some force in the arguments of the counsel for the appellants / opposite parties and therefore, in order to give a chance to the opposite parties 1 & 2 to agitate their right on merits, was inclined to allow this appeal by remanding the matter to the District Commission, to dispose of the case on merit. However, considering the lethargic attitude of the opposite parties 1 & 2 in non-filing the written version before the District Commission, we imposed a cost of Rs.3,000/- to be paid to the Legal Aid Account of the State Commission on or before 24.08.2023. Today, when the matter appeared in the list it was reported that the condition imposed by this Commission has been complied with. Hence, this appeal is allowed today by remanding back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law.
In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Consumer Commission, Perambalur in C.C. No.07/2021 dt.13.07.2022 and the matter is remanded back to the District Consumer Commission, Perambalur for fresh disposal according to law and on merits.
Both parties are directed to appear before the District Consumer Commission, Perambalur on 25.09.2023 for further proceedings. The appellants / opposite parties 1 & 2 are directed to file Vakalath, Written Version, proof affidavit, written argument and documents if any on the same day itself.
The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint on merits within three months after hearing both parties as expeditiously as possible as per law.
Both parties shall abide by the order of the District Commission regarding the mandatory deposit already made by the appellants / opposite parties 1 & 2 before this Commission.
R. SUBBIAH PRESIDENT Index : Yes/ No KIR/SCDRC/Chennai/Orders/August/2023