State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sheshkala Rustum Pawar, vs Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., on 22 February, 2011
1 F.A.No.:211/2010
Date of filing :30.03.2010
Date of order :22.02.2011
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL
COMMISSION,MUMBAI, CIRCUIT BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
FIRST APPEAL NO. : 211 OF 2010
IN COMPLAINT CASE NO.:124 OF 2009
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM :JALNA.
Sheshkala Rustum Pawar,
R/o Wadarwadi, Tq.Partur,
Dist.Jalna. ...APPELLANT
(Org.Complainant)
VERSUS
1. Branch Manager,
Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
19, Reliance Center Walchand Hirachand Marg,
Belard Estate, Mumbai.
2. Divisional Manager,
Kabal Insurance Broking Services Pvt.Ltd,
Shop No.1, Deesha Alankar Complex,
Town Centre, Cidco, Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS
(Org.Opponents)
CORAM : Shri.S.G.Deshmukh, Hon`ble Presiding Judicial Member.
Mrs.Uma S.Bora, Hon`ble Member.
Mr.K.B.Gawali, Hon`ble Member.
Present : None for appellant,
Adv.Shri.R.H.Dahat for respondent No.1,
None for respondent No.2.
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 original complainant against the judgment and order dated 12.11.2009 in complaint case No.124/2009 passed by District Consumer Forum, Jalna.
2. Appellant/Org.Complainant`s case before the Forum is that, her deceased husband Rustum Pawar was the farmer who died by falling in the canal. It is alleged that Government of Maharashtra had 2 F.A.No.:211/2010 obtained Group Personal Accident Insurance policy for the farmers in Maharashtra for sum assured Rs.1,00,000/-. Complainant being legal heir submitted the claim through Taluka Agriculture Officer, Jalna on 24.3.2008. But the claim was not settled and thus she approached the Forum.
3. Respondent No.1 appeared before the Forum and contended that they have not received the claim. Thus there is no question of deficiency on their part.
4. Respondent No.2 also appeared before the Forum and contended that they had received claim on 27.3.2008. But required papers such as bank pass book, 6-K certificate, death certificate etc. were not submitted. They had demanded the papers from the complainant but complainant did not provide those. Thus claim could not be settled.
5. The Forum below after going through the papers and hearing the parties dismissed the complaint.
6. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed by the District Forum, Jalna, original complainant came in appeal. Complainant also filed application for condonation of delay. Delay has been satisfactorily explained by appellant. We condone the delay.
7. We perused the papers. On perusal of papers, it reveals that complainant has submitted the claim to Taluka Agriculture officer, Jalna to forward the same to respondent No.2. It has come on record that the claim was not received by Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd. It has also come on record that respondent No.2 simply received the claim but required papers are not submitted by complainant. Thus respondent No.2 had asked the complainant to submit those. Forum has rightly considered this aspect. However we allow the appellant to 3 F.A.No.:211/2010 produce all the required papers to concern authority and concern authority is to dispose the claim after considering the papers. We dismiss the appeal. We allow the complainant to approach the Forum if aggrieved by the order of the insurance company.
K.B.Gawali, Mrs.Uma S.Bora S.G.Deshmukh Member Member Presiding Judicial Member. Mane