Kerala

StateCommission

A/15/734

MANAGER LIC OF INDIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

JESTY K I - Opp.Party(s)

ANITHA AJI

12 Oct 2015

ORDER

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SISUVIHARLANE VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

APPEAL NO.734/2015 IN IA.NO.1232/15

JUDGMENT DATED : 12.10.2015

 

(Appeal filed against the order in CC.No.129/14 on the file of CDRF, Thrissur order dated : 29.11.2014)

PRESENT

 

SRI.K.CHANDRADAS NADAR     : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SMT.A.RADHA                               : MEMBER

SMT.SANTHAMMA THOMAS      : MEMBER

 

APPELLANT

 

The Manager,

LIC of India,

Branch No.2, Kollannur Devassy Building,

Town Hall Road, Thrissur

Appellant rep.by authorised officer,

Manager L& HPF LIC of India,

Divisional Office,

Thiruvananthapuram

 

(By Adv.Sri.Anitha Aji)

 

Vs

RESPONDENT
 

Jesty.K.I

Koola House, Near Avinisseri,

Changala Gate.P.O

Ollur, Thrissur District

 

JUDGMENT

 

SRI.K.CHANDRADAS NADAR     : JUDICIAL MEMBER

          The opp.party in CC.No.129/2014 in the CDRF, Thrissur has preferred the appeal with the application to condone the delay of 265 days in filing the appeal. The complainant who was a health plus plan policy holder issued by the appellant approached the consumer forum when he was denied assistance after surgery for hernia. The appellant after accepting notice remained exparte. Hence an exparte order allowing the complaint was passed. The learned counsel for the appellant was heard at the time of admission.

 

          2.      The only allegation in the memorandum of appeal to explain the failure to appear before the consumer forum pursuant to the notice is that “no proper notice” was served on the appellant. While the allegation presupposes that notice was actually served what exactly was the impropriety committed by the consumer forum is not explained in the memorandum of appeal. Further, no justifiable reason is alleged to explain the long delay of 265 days in filing the appeal. The allegation is that after copy of the exparte order was received, it took some time to take administrative decision to file the appeal. 265 days is not sometime or short time and such a long time is not required to take any administrative decision .So the appellant was not serious in filing the appeal and the long delay is not properly explained. Hence the appeal as well as application to condone the delay in filing the appeal are dismissed as it is unnecessary to go into the merits of the case.

 

K.CHANDRADAS NADAR   : JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

 

A.RADHA                               : MEMBER

 

 

SANTHAMMA THOMAS      : MEMBER

Be/

 

 

 

 

 

 

KERALA STATE

CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION

 SISUVIHARLANE

VAZHUTHACADU

 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

APPEAL NO.734/2015

 IN

 IA.NO.1232/15

JUDGMENT DATED : 12.10.2015

 

 

                                                                                                                          BE/