Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.22 seconds)Kandimalla Raghavaiah & Co vs National Insurance Co. & Anr on 10 July, 2009
12. I have carefully considered the arguments advanced by both the sides and have examined the material on record. In respect of the question of delay in filing the complaint, it is seen that this issue was not raised in the written statement before the State Commission, however, the same has been raised before this Commission in the appeal. The Section 24A mandates that a complaint shall be filed within a period of two years from the date of cause of action. Hon'ble Supreme Court in in case of Kandimalla Raghavaiah & Co. versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. and another, 2009 CTJ 951 (Supreme Court) (CP) took view of the observations made in case State Bank of India vs. B.S. Agricultural Industries, 2009 CTJ 481 (SC) (CP) = JT 2009 (4) SC 191, as under:-
State Bank Of India vs M/S. B.S. Agricultural Industries(I) on 20 March, 2009
"12. Recently, in State Bank of India Vs. B.S. Agricultural Industries, 2009 CTJ 481 (SC) (CP) = JT 2009 (4) SC 191, this Court, while dealing with the same provision, has held;
The Consumer Protection Act, 1986
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
M/S.I.P.& Investment Corpn.Of Orissa ... vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd.And Anr on 22 August, 2016
9. Further, the learned counsel relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s. Industrial Promotion Corporation of Orissa Ltd. vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and another, Civil Appeal No. 1130 of 2007, wherein it has been held:
Lakshmi Bai & Ors. vs Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd ... on 5 August, 2011
6. The learned counsel for the appellant further stated that the State Commission has erred in not deciding the issue of limitation first. He stated that the incident had happened on the night of 23/24-5-1999 whereas the complaint has been filed on 23.2.2003. Thus, complaint has been filed with delay if considered from the date of incident. The letter repudiating the claim from the OP was sent on 11.7.2001. The complainant/respondent is claiming limitation from a letter dated 24.12.2001 of the OP which is a reply to the complainant on his letter that was sent for reconsideration of the decision of the repudiation. Learned counsel argued that first of all limitation is to be counted from the date of incident. Learned counsel referred to the judgment of this Commission in Laxshmi Bai Vs. ICICI Lombard General Insurance and others, R.P. Nos.3118-3144 of 2010 with other RPs, wherein the following has been observed:
Section 21 in The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 [Entire Act]
V.K. Appliances vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. on 1 October, 2013
7. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that even if the date of incident is not considered as a cause of action, the next cause of action arose when the OP insurance company repudiated the claim on 11.7.2001. If any further correspondence is made by the complainant, that correspondence cannot stretch the period of limitation. The learned counsel referred to the judgment of this Commission in V.K. Appliances vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd. , IV(2013) CPJ 419 (NC), wherein it has been observed that the complaint should have been filed within two years from the date of repudiation and in that case the complaint was dismissed as it was filed beyond two years from the date of repudiation.
1