State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
K Srinivas vs Icici Lombard Gic Ltd on 16 September, 2021
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION BASAVA BHAVAN, BANGALORE. First Appeal No. A/678/2021 ( Date of Filing : 08 Sep 2021 ) (Arisen out of Order Dated 18/08/2021 in Case No. CC/1784/2019 of District Bangalore 2nd Additional) 1. K Srinivas S/o Sri Kempaiah, Aged 45 yrs, R/at No.25/79, 8th cross, SriGandhanagar, Vishwaneedam Post, Bengaluru 560091. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. ICICI Lombard GIC Ltd 89, SVR Complex, Hosur Main Road, Madivala, Koramangala, Bengaluru 560068. Reptd by its Manager. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. Ravishankar PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MRS. Smt.Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi MEMBER PRESENT: Dated : 16 Sep 2021 Final Order / Judgement
BEFORE THE BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Basava Bhavan, Sri Basaveswara Circle, High grounds, Bangalore-560001.
Case No. - A/678/2021 Appellant/s 1 . K Srinivas .
S/o Sri Kempaiah, Aged 45 yrs, R/at No.25/79, 8th cross, SriGandhanagar, Vishwaneedam Post, Bengaluru 560091.
(By Manjunath Sridhar Hegde)
-Versus-
Respondent/s 1 . ICICI Lombard GIC Ltd .
89, SVR Complex, Hosur Main Road, Madivala, Koramangala, Bengaluru 560068. Reptd by its Manager.
16.09.2021 ORDER Mr. RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Advocate for appellant submits that after filing the further evidence of Opposite Party, they filed a memo before the District Commission permit them to file interrogatories and also cross-examination of RW-2 and objections to the Survey Report. After receiving the memo, the District Commission on 18.08.2021 rejected the memo stating that the said dispute is not with respect to the medical negligence and there is no scope for cross-examination. Hence, memo was rejected and posted for arguments.
Here we noticed that the complainant in his memo also prayed for filing interrogatories. When the prayer for cross-examination was rejected, the District Commission ought to provide an opportunity to file interrogatories whereas the District Commission had posted for arguments. Hence, in the interest of equity and justice, an opportunity should be provided for the complainant to furnish their interrogatories with respect to the evidence of RW - 1 & 2. Therefore, a direction is given to the District Commission to receive the interrogatories on the next date of hearing itself. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
JUDICIAL MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. Ravishankar] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MRS. Smt.Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi] MEMBER