During the course of arguments Ld.Counsel for the Appellants has placed reliance on ruling of the Honble National Commission in the case of Lakshmi Bai & Ors.V/s. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. reported in III (2011) CPJ 507 (NC), in which it is observed while discussing the insurance claim for protection of a person below poverty line that, Until payment of sum assured, it remains a case of continuous cause of action. Remedy under Act cannot be barred on the ground that jurisdiction of Fora was not invoked within two years from date of death in capacitation. Case remanded to District Fora for reconsideration.
Print Page
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Smt Chandrabhaga Dagdu Hode & Ors. vs Icici Lombard General Insurance ... on 20 November, 2013
Common order in Appeals bearing Nos.A/12/744 TO A/12/754 Per Honble Mrs.Usha S. Thakare Presiding Judicial Member In all these eleven appeals common law point is involved and therefore all five appeals are decided by this common order.
2. In Appeal No.A/12/744 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt.Chandrabhaga Dagdu Hode against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/31/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/281/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
3. In Appeal No.A/12/745 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt.Rubina Hanif Kazi against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/24/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/274/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
4. In Appeal No.A/12/746 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt.Shital Mahendra Jadhav against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/29/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/279/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
5. In Appeal No.A/12/747 filed by Appellant/Complainant Prakash Dhondu Shinde against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/28/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/278/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
6. In Appeal No.A/12/748 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt. Sarita Suresh Dalvi against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/32/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/282/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
7. In Appeal No.A/12/749 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt. Vijaya Vijay Tambe against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/25/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/275/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
8. In Appeal No.A/12/750 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt. Sangita Vishnu Shinde against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/22/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/272/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
9. In Appeal No.A/12/751 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt.Manjula @ Rita Siddhartha Gamre against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/26/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/276/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
10. In Appeal No.A/12/752 filed by Appellant/Complainant Shri Shivprasad Anant Prabhu against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/30/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/280/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
11. In Appeal No.A/12/753 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt. Pratibha Prakash Dongre against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/23/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/273/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
12. In Appeal No.A/12/754 filed by Appellant/Complainant Smt.Sulochana Yashwant Salvi against ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., has challenged the order passed by Ld.Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, South Mumbai in Misc.Application No.SMF/MUM/27/2011 decided on 25.04.2012. By the order under challenge the Ld.District Forum was pleased to reject the application for condonation of delay filed by the Complainant and as a result Complaint No.SMF/MUM/277/2011 was not entertained by the District Forum.
13. Ld.District Forum while rejecting the applications for condonation of delay observed that the Complainants have failed to assign sufficient reason to explain inordinate delay in filing the complaint, therefore, the application for condonation of delay deserves to be rejected. Therefore, the Complainants/Appellants have preferred respective appeals.
14. We have heard Ld.Counsel for the Appellants and Ld.Counsel for the Respondent.
15. It is urged on behalf of the Complainant that the complaint is filed for grant of compensation of `1,00,000/-
on account of accidental death of a farmer. Each Complainant had submitted the claim through proper channel to the Opponent with relevant documents within a period of limitation as per agricultural accident policy. The Opponent did not bother to pay amount of compensation under said policy in spite of repeated requests. Claims of the Complainants were neither rejected nor accepted, therefore, the complaints were filed. As an abundant precaution application for condonation of delay was moved.
16. During the course of arguments Ld.Counsel for the Appellants has placed reliance on ruling of the Honble National Commission in the case of Lakshmi Bai & Ors.V/s. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. reported in III (2011) CPJ 507 (NC), in which it is observed while discussing the insurance claim for protection of a person below poverty line that, Until payment of sum assured, it remains a case of continuous cause of action. Remedy under Act cannot be barred on the ground that jurisdiction of Fora was not invoked within two years from date of death in capacitation. Case remanded to District Fora for reconsideration.
17. Ld.Counsel for the Complainant/Appellant urged that non-settlement of insurance claim without any tangible reason constitutes gross deficiency in service on the part of the Insurance Company. The Consumer/Complainant, who is a farmer should not suffer due to act of the Opponent Insurance Company. Therefore, due to abundant precaution delay condonation application is filed which is wrongly dismissed by Ld.District Forum. To avoid injustice the appeal may be allowed.
18. Observation of the Honble National Commission in case cited, supra, is squarely applicable to the case in hand because there is a continuous cause of action. Sufficient grounds are led down by the complainant to condone the delay. Delay, if any, is here condoned. The complaints are required to be entertained and dealt with as per law. As a result the appeals deserve to be allowed. It is a fit case to be remanded back. Hence, we pass the following order:
O R D E R (1) Appeal No.A/12/744 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/31/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/31/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/281/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/281/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/281/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
(2) Appeal No.A/12/745 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/24/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/24/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/274/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/274/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/274/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
(3) Appeal No.A/12/746 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/29/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/29/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/279/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/279/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/279/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
(4) Appeal No.A/12/747 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/28/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/28/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/278/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/278/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/278/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
(5) Appeal No.A/12/748 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/32/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/32/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/282/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/282/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/282/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
(6) Appeal No.A/12/749 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/25/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/25/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/275/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/275/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/275/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
Appeal No.A/12/750 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/22/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/22/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/272/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/272/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/272/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
Appeal No.A/12/751 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/26/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/26/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/276/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/276/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/276/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
Appeal No.A/12/752 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/30/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/30/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/280/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/280/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/280/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
Appeal No.A/12/753 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/23/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/23/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/273/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/273/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/273/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
Appeal No.A/12/754 is hereby allowed.
(i) Oder passed by the District Forum in Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/27/2011 is hereby set aside. In place of it, following order is substituted:
Misc.Application No. SMF/MUM/27/2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned.
(ii) Similarly order passed in Complaint No.SMF/MUM/277/2011 is also set aside.
(iii) Complaint No. SMF/MUM/277/2011 is remitted back to the District Forum for decision on merit.
(iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Forum on 09/01/2014.
(vi) The District Forum is directed to decide the Complaint Case No. SMF/MUM/277/2011 as early as possible within a period of 90 days.
Pronounced on 20th November, 2013.
[HON'ABLE MRS. Usha S.Thakare] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'ABLE MR. Narendra Kawde] MEMBER ep
No comments:
Post a Comment