NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/3447/2018

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

GOVINDRAM - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. SUMAN BAGGA & ASSOCIATES

02 Jan 2019

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 3447 OF 2018
 
(Against the Order dated 16/02/2018 in Appeal No. 1604/2016 of the State Commission Rajasthan)
1. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
PLOT NO. 6, 1ST FLOOR, PUSA ROAD, NEAR METRO PILLAR NO. 81,
NEW DELHI-110005
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. GOVINDRAM
S/O. MAHADEV, R/O. 86/378, JHALANA DUNGRI, KACHHI BASTI,
JAIPUR
RAJASTHAN
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL,PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. M. SHREESHA,MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate
For the Respondent :

Dated : 02 Jan 2019
ORDER

IA No. 23868 of 2018

There is a delay of 214 days in filing the present Revision Petition.

Cause shown in the Application is sufficient.  As the ground taken is that the file was misplaced in the Office of the local Counsel, the delay is condoned and the Petition is treated as having been filed within limitation.

The Application stands disposed of.

Revision Petition

          Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and perused the impugned order dated 16.02.2018, passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission).

          The claim of ₹6,42,000/- made by the Complainant, Respondent herein, regarding the insurance amount on account of theft of the vehicle in question was rejected by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jaipur-IV, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the District Forum) vide its order dated 17.11.2016.  However, by the impugned order, the State Commission has partly allowed the Appeal, preferred by the Complainant against the order of the District Forum, and directed the Petitioner herein to pay a sum of ₹4,71,000/- to the Complainant towards the insurance claim on the ground that this amount was agreed into between the parties at one stage.

We do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned order as the same has been passed by the State Commission after recording a finding that there was an agreement between the parties to pay the amount of ₹4,71,000/- towards insurance claim to the Complainant.

Accordingly, the Revision Petition is dismissed.

 
......................J
R.K. AGRAWAL
PRESIDENT
......................
M. SHREESHA
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.