Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

RA/24/61

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY - Complainant(s)

Versus

SANJAY S/O RADHESHYAM - Opp.Party(s)

RAVINDRA TIWARI

30 May 2024

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

                            

REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 61 OF 2024

 

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.                                                                 …          APPLICANT

 

               Versus

 

SANJAY S/O SHRI RADHESHYAM SEN.                                                             …         RESPONDENT

 

BEFORE:

 

                  HON’BLE SHRI A. K. TIWARI                   :      ACTING PRESIDENT

                 HON’BLE DR. SRIKANT PANDEY           :      MEMBER                          

 

                                      O R D E R

 

30.05.2024

 

       Shri Ravindra Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant.

           

As per A. K. Tiwari :

               Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

               By way of this review application the applicant sought review of order dated 18.04.2024 passed by this Commission in First Appeal No.728 of 2020 (United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Sanjay S/O Shri Radheshyam Sen) decided on merits.

2.                Section 50 of the Act of 2019 which is relevant for the purposes for deciding the issue involved in the case is reproduced hereunder:-

50. Review by State Commission in certain cases- The State Commission shall have the power to review any of the order passed by it if there is an error apparent on the face of the record, either of its own motion or on an application made by any of the parties within thirty days of such order.

 

-2-

3.                Bare perusal of the aforesaid section makes it clear that an order can be reviewed by the State Commission when there is an error apparent on the face of the record. 

4.                In view of the aforesaid, we have gone through the order minutely and on going through the order, we find that there is no such error, apparent on the face of the record in the order which is being challenged, therefore, it does not call for exercising review jurisdiction conferred upon the State Commission under Section 50 of the Act of 2019.  Accordingly, the review application filed by the applicant, seeking review of order not being maintainable, is hereby dismissed.

 

             (A. K. Tiwari)                      (Dr. Srikant Pandey) 

          Acting President                              Member