State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sharda Devi vs Sbi General Insurance Co. Ltd. on 6 February, 2018
1
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
U.T., CHANDIGARH
Appeal No. : 14 of 2018
Date of Institution : 02.02.2018
Date of Decision : 06.02.2018
Sharda Devi Garg wife of Sh.Tirath Raj Garg, resident of Amin
Chand House, Lal Bagh, Upper Kathua, S himla (HP)
--Appellant
Versus
[1] SBI General Insurance Company Limited, 101,201, 301 Natraj
Junction of Western Express Highway, Andheri Road, Mumbai -
400069 through its Managing Di rector.
[2] SBI General Insurance Company Limited , SCO 457-458, Ist
Floor, Sector -35-C, Chandigarh-160036 through its Branch
manager.
----Respondents
Appeal against order dated 10.01.2018 passed by
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -I, U.T.
Chandigarh in Execution Application No.101 of 2017
BEFORE: JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT.
MR. DEV RAJ, MEMBER.
MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER Argued by: Dr.Joseph, on behalf of the appellant PER JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT A complaint filed by the appellant against the respondents was allowed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum(I), U.T. Chandigarh (for short the Forum only), granting the following relief;
[a] To pay Rs.4,00,000/ - being the sum insured a personal accident claim to the Complainant; [b] To pay Rs.25,000/ - as compensation for mental agony & harassment suffered by the complainant; 2 [c] To pay Rs.10,000/ - as costs of litigation. Specific directions were issued to pay the amount granted to the complainant within a specified period, failing which, it was ordered that the amount awarded shall carry penal interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing the said complaint.
2. The appellant/decree holder came to the Forum by filing an execution application with a grievance that the order passed was not complied with , within 30 days, as directed, and the awarded amount wa s paid to her belatedly , as such, she is entitled to get the amount of penal interest on the awarded amount.
3. Upon notice, reply was filed by the respondents. It was specifically stated that the order passed by the Forum on 27.3.2017 stood complied with, within the stipulated period. Cheque towards the awarded amount was prepared on 5.5.2017 which was received by Counsel for the appellant vide receipt dated 12.5.2017. The Forum, by taking note of the office report, correctly noted that certified copy of the order dated 27.3.2017 was despatched to the respondents/judgment debtors on 5.4.2017.Cheque towards the awarded amount was prepared on 5.5.2017 and it was delivered to the Counsel for the appellant on 12.5.2017. There is nothing on record to show that the order passed was not complied with by the respondents within 30 days. The preparing of cheque and its delivery within a short span of time makes it clear that there was no intention on the part of the judgment debtor s not to comply with the order under execution. The appellant has raised unnecessary 3 grievance for which no relief can be granted to her. The order passed by the Forum is perfectly justified. We find no case made out to interfere in the order, under challenge.
4. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed, at the preliminary stage, with no order as to costs. The order of the District Forum is upheld.
5. Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.
6. The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion. Pronounced.
06-02-2018 [JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.)] PRESIDENT (DEV RAJ) MEMBER (PADMA PANDEY) Js MEMBER 4 STATE COMMISSION (First Appeal No. 14 of 2018) Argued by: Dr.Joseph, on behalf of the appellant Dated the 6th February,2018 ORDER Vide our detailed order of the even date, recorded separately, this appeal stands dis missed, at the preliminary stage, with no order as to costs. The order of the District Forum is upheld.
(DEV RAJ) (JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.) (PADMA PANDEY)
MEMBER PRESIDENT MEMBER
5