State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Mohammad Irshad Son Of Sh. Babu Hayat, ... vs Icici Lombard Motor Insurance Having ... on 14 March, 2014
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA First Appeal No.20 of 2014 Date of Institution : 09.01.2014 Date of Decision : 14.03.2014 Mohammad Irshad son of Sh. Babu Hayat, aged 40 years, resident of VPO Buria, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar. Appellant (Complainant) Versus ICICI Lombard Motor Insurance having its Branch Office at Model Town, near J.K. Presidency, Gobindpuri Road, Yamuna Nagar. Respondent (Opposite Party) CORAM : Honble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.
Present : Mr. Manoj Punia, Advocate for the appellant Mr. S.K. Chauhan, Advocate for the opposite party.
O R D E R Justice Nawab Singh, President (ORAL):
Appellants complaint was dismissed in default by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (for short District Forum), Yamuna Nagar on July 30th, 2013. Against the said order, he filed appeal before this Commission, which was accepted on October 24th, 2013 subject to payment of Rs.5000/- as cost and the complainant was directed to appear before the District Forum on December 4th, 2013.
He could not appear on December 4th, 2013 and appeared on December 5th, 2013. He moved an application to allow him to deposit the cost and restore the complaint at its original number. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum vide impugned order December 05th, 2013 dismissed the application by observing as under :-
As per directions of the Honble State Commission, Haryana, Panchkula dated 24.10.2013 the cost of Rs.5000/- was to be deposited by the Complainant on the first date of appearance i.e. 04.12.2013 but the complainant neither appeared on 4.12.2013 nor deposited the amount of cost with the District Forum. In these circumstances, it is clear that the complainant has failed to comply with the order of the Honble State Commission, Haryana, Panchkula. Thus, the order of District Forum earlier passed on 30.07.2013 is revived. Hence, the application moved by the complainant is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed. Papers be attached with the main file.
2. It is not understandable as to how the District Forum has ordered to revive the earlier order dated July 30th, 2013 passed by it particularly when the same was set aside. The file was not taken up by the District Forum on December 4th, 2013. The fault of the appellant was only to the extent that he did not appear before the District Forum on the date fixed by this Commission and the explanation put forth by him was that he learnt about the date on which he was supposed to appear before the District Forum in the evening of December 4th, 2013.
Be that as it may, the impugned order is set aside and the District Forum is directed to restore the complaint at is original number subject to the cost of Rs.5000/- already ordered by this commission vide order dated October 24th, 2013
3. The appellant is directed to appear before the District Forum, Yamuna Nagar, on April 09th, 2014.
4. Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum forthwith.
Announced:
14.03.2014 (B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member (Nawab Singh) President UK