D.O.F:30/08/2022
D.O.O:05/12/2022
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
RA-7/2022 in CC.No.4/2019
Dated this, the 5th day of December 2022
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
- The Divisional Manager,
United India Insurance Company Limited,
Tiger Hills, Kasaragod Taluk &District-671121 :Petitioner/Opposite Parties
- Mr.K. Hareesh Kumar,
Divisional Manager,
United India Insurance Company Limited, Tiger Hills
Kasaragod Taluk and District- 671121
( Adv:C.Damodaran)
And
Hamza .M.M, aged 58 years
S/o. Abdullakunhi
M.M.House,Melparamba,
Post: Kalanad, Kasaragod, :Complainant
Kasaragod. 671317
(Adv: K.Kumaran Nair & Sabari.L.S)
ORDER
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
The opposite party in CC- 04/2019 is the petitioner in RA 07/2022. RA is filed under section 40 of Consumer Protection Act- 2019 to review the order dated 20/07/2022 (received to the party on 07/09/2022)
The Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission Kasaragod as per its order dated 20/07/2022 passed its order directing opposite party to pay the Complainant the sum of Rs.3,20,000/- towards balance insurance payable and to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation besides litigation cost. The grievance of the petitioner is that petitioner/opposite party has already paid Rs.3,20,000/- on 10/12/2021 evidenced by memo dated 10/12/2021 before final order, and also order is silent about transfer of RC and payment of floor rent and prayed to review the order.
Respondent/ complainant filed counter dated 11/11/2022. In the counter respondent admits receipt of the amount of Rs.3,20,000/- as per direction of commission. Memo dated 10/12/2021 endorsing receipt of amount is admitted and ensured that ready to transfer the RC on full payment of the amount awarded by the commission.
Section 40 of Consumer Protection Act-2019 has now provided the district Commission with the power to review any order, in certain instances like error apparent on the face of the record, either Suo motor or an application filed by the parties within 30 days of said order.
Considering the nature and circumstances of the case, there is merit in the review petition, petitioner has made out a strong case by pointing out the mistake
apparent on the face of record for review namely that petitioner/ opposite party paid Rs.3,20,000/- prior to final order fairly admitted by the complainant and also regarding the transfer of RC, since the IDV is paid by petitioner / opposite party the R.C of the vehicle is to be transferred to the insurer. Another error pointed out by the petitioner is regarding the floor rent, due to the latches of petitioner/ opposite party the vehicle kept idle for a long period therefore petitioner/ opposite party is liable to pay floor rent we fixes the quantum of amount for floor rent for Rs.15,000/- payable by petitioner/ opposite party to the work shop M/s VPK Motors.
Hence the direction to pay Rs.3,20,000/- to the complainant found in the final order dated 20/07/2022 stands reviewed thereby directions to pay Rs.3,20,000/- stands deleted and adds that respondent/ complainant is directed to take steps to transfer the RC to the name of insurer and also petitioner/ opposite party is directed to pay Rs.15,000/- as floor rent to the workshop by process of review. Petitioner is bonafide and hence RA 07/2022 is allowed as above.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
