Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.32 seconds)Dr. J.J. Merchant & Ors vs Shrinath Chaturvedi on 12 August, 2002
12. Evidence on the record of both complaints have been
examined by us. Vide Ex.C-1, the policy term is recorded as 16
years and premium payment term is recorded as 10 years. Ex.C-2 is
legal notice sent by complainants to OP. Ex.C-3 is postal receipt of
legal notice. Ex.C-4 is deed of special power of attorney. Ex.C-6 is
the proposal form and frequency of premium payment is yearly and
no single premium is recorded in the proposal form on the record.
Proposal form Ex.C-6 is signed by complainant Renu Gupta and
declaration has been made about it, as contained in it. The District
Forum has not decided the controversy on the ground that matter
needs elaborate evidence. We are of this view that matter is not so
complex, as not to be determined by Consumer Fora. Hon'ble
Supreme Court held in Dr.J.J Merchant and others versus
Shrinath Chaturvedi, reported in III(2002) CPJ 8 (SC) that State
Commission and District Forum are headed by retired Judges and
First Appeal No.546 of 2013 12
they are competent to decide complex issue of law or facts. Not
proper to hold where negligence of experts alleged, consumers
should approach civil court. Since Consumer Fora are presided over
by Retired Judicial Officers and hence the Consumer Forum cannot
shy away from deciding the case, simply on the ground that it has no
jurisdiction to decide the case. On the basis of law laid down in the
above-referred authority, we find that matter cannot be said to be so
complex as not be decided by the Consumer Forum. The order of
the District Forum in relegating the parties to civil court is not
sustainable in our view.
1