State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sh. Jagjit Singh on 10 September, 2015
H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
SHIMLA.
First Appeal No.: 159/2015
Date of Presentation: 10.09.2015.
Date of Decision: 10.09.2015
........................................................................
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.,
State Mumbai, 19 Reliance Centre Valchand
Hirachand Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai
Through its Manager Legal,
SCO145-146, 2nd Floor, Madhya Marg,
Sector 9-C, Chandigarh-160009.
.... Appellant
Versus
Jagjit Singh S/o late Shri Bansi Ram,
Resident of Village Jaral, Post Office Chakmoh,
Tehsil Barsar, District Hamirpur, H.P.
... Respondent
..............................................................................
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, President
Hon'ble Mrs. Prem Chauhan, Member
Hon'ble Mr. Vijay Pal Khachi, Member
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Appellant: Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate
For the Respondent: Nemo.
................................................................................
O R D E R:
Justice Surjit Singh, President (Oral) M.A. No.473/2015.
Delay condoned. Disposed of.
M.A. No. 474/2015.
2. Disposed of, as Infructuous, in view of disposal of appeal.
1Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order? Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Jagjit Singh (F.A. No.159/2015) F.A. No.159/2015.
3. Present appeal, which has been filed today, is directed against the order dated 10.06.2015, of learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hamirpur, whereby a non-bailable warrant of arrest, returnable for 16.09.2015, has been issued against the appellant, in execution petition No.23/2014 titled Jagjit Singh vs. Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.
4. Respondent Jagjit Singh, filed a complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the appellant- Insurance Company in the year 2008, which was registered as Consumer Complaint No.22/2008. That complaint was decided, vide order dated 13.02.2014, and direction was given to the appellant to pay a sum of `1,10,000/-, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, on account of insurance money, and in addition, direction was given to the appellant to pay `40,000/-, as compensation and `10,000/-, as litigation expenses.
2Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Jagjit Singh (F.A. No.159/2015)
5. Appeal was not filed against the aforesaid order by the appellant. According to the appellant, the counsel engaged to represent it, never informed it, about passing of the impugned order, with the result that the order could not be complied with. Respondent, therefore, filed an execution petition. Notice was sent to the appellant at its head office address of Mumbai, whereas the complaint was filed against the branch office Amritsar. It seems that notice had been sent by registered post, but the same having not been received back within thirty days, presumption of service was drawn. Nobody appeared for the appellant and consequently non-bailable warrant of arrest was ordered to be issued, vide impugned order dated 10.06.2015. Appellant is aggrieved by this order of issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest and, has, therefore, preferred the present appeal.
6. We have worked out the money payable by the appellant in terms of order dated 13.02.2014, passed in the main 3 Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Jagjit Singh (F.A. No.159/2015) complaint. The amount works out at `2,25,000/- (approximately). Against this amount of `2,25,000/-, appellant has deposited with the learned District Forum, a sum of `2,35,000/- as is made out from an application moved by the appellant before the learned District Forum for receiving two bank drafts, one for a sum of `2,20,720/-, and another for `15,180/-, which is available at page 12 of the present appeal record. On the application itself, there is an endorsement of presentation of the application recorded by the Civil Nazir of the learned District Forum. As per this endorsement, two bank drafts, in the aforesaid amounts of money, have been submitted.
7. In view of the above stated position, especially the fact that the appellant has deposited money in excess of the money actually payable by it, with the learned District Forum, as also the fact that the counsel for the appellant says that the appellant does not intend to file any appeal against the order dated 13.02.2014, which means that the 4 Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Jagjit Singh (F.A. No.159/2015) money can immediately be released in favour of the respondent, we not only allow the present appeal and set aside the order dated 10.06.2015, but also order in exercise of our revisional power, under Section 17 (1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, that the execution instituted by the respondent, shall not be further proceeded with, and shall be filed as fully satisfied.
8. A copy of the order be sent to each of the parties, free of cost, as per Rules.
(Justice Surjit Singh) President (Prem Chauhan) Member (Vijay Pal Khachi) Member September 10, 2015.
N Mehta} 5