State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Mrs.Mangala Marutrao Taware vs New India Assurance Co.Ltd. And Ors. on 28 July, 2009
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION MAHARASHTRA STATE, MUMBAI FIRST APPEAL NO.564/2009 Date of filing: 31/03/2009 IN CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.205/2004 Date of order : 28/07/2009 DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, PUNE @ MISC.APPLICATION NO.569/2009 Mrs.Mangala Marutrao Taware R/o.Post Sanghavi, Taluka Baramati District Pune ..Appellant/org.complainant v/s. 1.
New India Assurance Co.Ltd.
Regional off.Pune Satara Road, Pune Through its Regional Manager/Authorized person
2. New India Assurance Co.Ltd.
throught its Branch Manager/Authorized person Branch: Baramati Municipal Commercial Complex Wing-3, Bhigwan chowk Baramati 413102
3. Shri Kalantre- Development officer New India Assurance Co.Ltd.
Baramati, B.O.152902 Baramati Municipal Commercial Complex Wing-3, Bhigwan chowk, Baramati 413102
4. Satishkumar & Co.- (Chartered Engineer) 6, Ganesh Prasad, Ekbote colonoy 365/38, Ghorpade peth, Pune 411 042 Through Shri Satishkumar Anand
5. The United Western Bank Ltd.
presently known as ICICI Bank since merged with ICICI Bank Baramati branch, Taluka Baramati, District Pune Through its Branch Manager/Authorized person
6. J.Williams & Co.
authorized dealer:Hindustan Motors 2422, East street, Pune 411 001 Through its Manager/Authorized personRespondents/org.O.Ps Corum: Shri S.R.Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member Mrs.S.P.Lale, Honble Member Present : Mr.Shailesh Chavan -Advocate for the appellant O R A L O R D E R Per Shri S.R.Khanzode, Honble Presiding Judicial Member
1. This appeal is preferred against the order/award dated 5/2/2009 passed in consumer complaint no.205/2004, Mrs.Mangala Marutrao Taware v/s. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. and others passed by District Consumer Forum, Pune. Consumer complaint is filed consequent to the insurance claim made when the vehicle bearing no.MH-12-YA-5995 met with an accident on 25/6/2003. Said claim was yet to be settled or even repudiated. Holding accordingly that the complaint is premature, Forum below dismissed the complaint and feeling aggrieved thereby, this appeal is preferred.
2. Heard Mr.Shailesh Chavan
-Advocate for the appellant. Perused the record.
3. There is delay of 18 days in filing the appeal. Delay is attributed to the negligence on the part of legal firm handling the matter. For the negligence of the lawyer, party should not be allowed to suffer and, therefore, holding that delay is satisfactorily explained, we condone the same.
4. As far as merits of the appeal is concerned, we find that it is the complainant who is failing in giving response to the investigation carried out by the Insurance Co. to settle the claim. Due to non co-operation and failure on part of the complainant to comply specific request of the insurance company, the claim could not be settled. It is not repudiated and as such consumer complaint being premature, rightly dismissed by the Forum below. We find no reason to interfere with it. Thus, finding the appeal devoid of any substance and pass the following order:-
ORDER
1.
Misc.application No.569/2009 for condonation of delay stands allowed.
2. Appeal stands dismissed in limine.
3. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
(S.P.Lale) (S.R.Khanzode) Member Presiding Judicial Member Ms.