Commissioner dated 26-09-2007. Due to wrong advice and
prosecuting wrong remedy before the wrong forum the assessee was
prevented from filing appeal before ... issue. The Madras High Court found that
prosecuting a wrong remedy before the wrong forum is reasonable cause
in not filing the appeal within
Govt. Pleader for the appellant, submitted that the
District Forum wrongly interpreted the provisions of Section 56(2) of the
Electricity Act,2003 (hereinafter referred ... supply of the electricity.
He further submitted that the
District Forum wrongly observed that the arrears were not continuously shown in
the duplicate bills because
paid to the respondent. The
appellant submitted that
i.
The Forum wrongly appreciated section 113 of the
Indian Insurance Act and decided that after payment ... unjustifiable.
iii. The Forum
granted Rs.80000/- when no such request was made in the complaint.
iv. Forum wrongly
appreciated terms of the policy which
applicants had reasoned that due to filing of the appeal before wrong forum, the delay has occurred.
5. I find that the sole reason ... impugned Order, the appellant had filed the appeal before wrong forum. I find that the reasons cited by the appellant for condonation of delay
District Forum is unjust, unfair, improper, illegal, without jurisdiction and is
against the law and facts on record. The District Forum wrongly and
illegally dismissed ... facts. This finding of the learned District Forum on
this ground is totally erroneous because the District Forum failed to
appreciate that the deceased
complainant filed a complaint before
the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, (in short, District Forum)
claiming a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- towards ... Protection Act. Hence, the
complaint was barred by time. The
District Forum wrongly appreciated the reports from GTB Hospital and Sir Ganga
Ram Hospital, which
submitted by opponent insurance company
before District Consumer Forum, Forum without considering the
point of limitation wrongly allowed the complaint. It is further
submitted that ... covered personal accident risk
of vehicle owner, but District Consumer Forum wrongly allowed the
complaint etc. To which, it is denied by Shri.Tandale learned
repudiating the claim of the insured. The District
Forum was wrong, in holding to the
contrary. The findings of the District Forum, in this regard ... cases (supra), in support of his contention. The District Forum was wrong, in holding that claim of the complainant
could not be validly repudiated
they indulge into unfair trade practice. The
remaining averments, were denied, being wrong.
8. The complainant filed replication
wherein, he reiterated all the averments, contained ... entitled to the same. It
was further submitted that the District Forum wrongly held that the
respondent/complainant was entitled to refund
that the time had been spent by the
Appellant to approach wrong forum, this Tribunal condoned
the delay in filing the Appeal. However, the Appellate
