Order below MA 24/2021 in CC-214/2021

M.P.KASAR, MEMBER

1) Complainant states that, the cause of action arose on 12/04/2019 i.e. the date of repudiation of the c laim.According to the complainant the limitation period of 2 years for filing the complaint gets over on 11/04/2021.  It is stated that, due to the spread of pandemic named  Covid -19 the Govt.of India declared the lock down all over the country somewhere around 22/03/2020.  Therefore in view of the said lockdown the Hon’ble SC had passed the order dated 23/03/2020 in SMW CN3/2020 extending the limitation period for filing all complaints/petitions and other miscellaneous Applications. Complainant submits that, the delay of 129 days in filing the complaint is not intentional but due to circumstances beyond their control and therefore the applicants craves leave to file said application for condonation of delay of 129 days in filing the above numbered complainant i.e.CC/214/2021.

2) Opposite party No.1 appeared and filed say to application stated in that, a complaint is required to be file within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. According to the opposite party No.1 the cause of action as alleged in this complaint is the date of heart attack death of the late Mr.Jethalal Bhanushali i.3.12/04/2019 and the complaint is filed in the year 2021 i.e. after two years the incident occurred. The last date for filing of the complaint was 12/04/2021.  The complainant not explains the delay of each day. Hence the application be dismissed with cost.

3) Opposite party No.2 appeared and filed say stating in that, complaint shall not be admitted unless it is filed within 2 years from the date of cause of action aroused. In present case limitation begins from 07/10/2018 i.e. death of Jethalal Bhanudhali delay is not of 129 days but of 314 days. Opposite party No.2 is just a necessary party there is no any allegations against opposite party No.2 in regard deficiency in services. Hence application be rejected against opposite party No.2.

4) Hear Ad.Hemrajani for complainant, Adv.Sarika Kamble for opposite party No.1 & Adv.Mayura Jagtap for opposite party No.2. Perused application and written say filed by opposite party No.1 & 2.perused case laws filed on record. To determine application on merit  and in order to that we frame issues as follows :-

                                                       ISSUES

FINDINGS:-

5) As to issue No.1 :-It is noted that Mr.Jethalal Bhanushali had obtained the life insurance policy bearing No.4005/M/DCB/104751031/00/000 for the period covering from 00:00 hrs of 14/07/2015 to midnightof 13/07/2020 COVERING HIS DEATH DUE TO ACCIDENT for total sum insured Rs.4267000/-& total premium paid including service tax ids Rs.85340/- Unfortunately Jethalal Bhanushali died due to cardogenic shock. It is noted that, opposite party repudiated the complainant’s claim stating that the policy only covers accidental events. Vide repudiation letter dated 12/04/2019.It is noted that, cause of action arisen on date of repudiation i.e.12/04/2019. In view of prescribed limitation period below section 69 complaint ought to have file within 2 years from the date of cause of action aroused.Admmitedlyaccording to complainant due lockdown circumstancescomplainant could not filed the complaint within limitation period. We held here that cause of action has arisen on claim repudiation date i.e.12/04/2019.We are not agree with opposite parties that cause of action aroused on the date when Mr.Jethalal Bhabushali died.

 Hon’ble State Commission has held in First Appeal No.FA 15/623 vide dated 03/04/2018  Smt.Kamalavati Suryakant Rane v/s National Insurance Company and otrs  in  regard condonation of delay  that ,issues related to insurance claim not get to complainant and issues raised by the opposite party can be decide on meritso delay caused to file present complaint i.e. of 129 days is condonable in viewof Hon’ble state Commission decision in FA/15/623 , pandemic circumstances & Hon’ble Apex Courts directions in regard extension of filing miscellaneous applicationso below section 69(2) of consumer protection Act 2019 complainant had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within limitation mentioned insection 69(1) from the date of cause of action aroused. So we pass order in view of issue No.2 as follows:-

6698606. ORDER

1.  MA No.21/24 is hereby allowed and delay of 129 days is hereby condoned below section 69(2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019 in filing present complaint No.CC -21/214. Compliant Case to be keep for admission.
2. No order as to cost.