Heard learned counsel for both the sides.
2. This appeal is filed U/S-15 of erstwhile Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.
3. The case of complainant, in nutshell is that the complainant had purchased the policy from the OP bearing Policy No.U154427157 for sum assured of Rs.6,50,000/-. It is alleged by the complainant that the OP stated to have sent the policy but it has not reached the complainant. Since, the policy is not received the benefits are not available. So, the complaint was filed.
4. The OP filed written version stating that they have sent the policy and it has been received by the complainant as revealed from the receipt submitted by the Courier Service, OP No.4. Therefore, they have no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
.5. After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum passed the following order:-
Xxxx xxxx xxxx
“The Consumer complaint No.273 of 2012 be and is hereby allowed on contest.
- The Opp. Parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.6,50,000/-(Rupees six lakh fifty thousand only) to the complainant with 9 % interest from 1st December,2012 till payment and we direct accordingly.
- The Opp. parties are also directed to pay a compensation of Rs.30,000/- towards harassment and mental agony alongwith Rs.5000/- towards the cost of this litigation.
This order shall be complied within 30 days of receipt of the order.”
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the order suffers from technicality under the Act. According to him on06.03.2014 a single member passed the order but on the next day the President and the women member signed the order by agreeing to the view of the Member who was written the order. He submitted that learned District Forum has committed error in law by not following the Section-29(A) read with Section-14(2-A) of the Act. The President should be part of the order pronounced on 06.03.2014. Therefore, the matter should be remitted back for passing valid order by the learned District Commission.
7. Learned counsel for the respondent agreed with the view of the appellant and submitted that the technically error may be removed by remanding the matter to the learned District Commission for denovo hearing and dispose of according to law. He supports the impugned order.
8. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties, perused the DFR and impugned order.
9. The impugned order shows that Mr.N.C.Mohanty, the then Member has written the order by putting the signature and date on 06.03.2014 but the President and Member (women) have signed the order dtd.07.03.2014 after agreeing to the view of the learned member Mr.N.C.Mohanty. We have gone through the DFR and found that on 07.03.2014 no order has been passed. Section 14(2-A) of the Act states as follows:-
Every order made by the District Forum under Sub-section(1) shall be signed by its President and the matter or members who conducted the proceeding:
Provided that where the proceeding is conducted by the President and one member and they differ on any point or points, they shall state the point or points on which they differ and refer the same to the other member for hearing on such point or points and the opinion of the majority shall be the order of the District Forum.”
10. In view of the above provisions of Section-14(2-A) of the Act the President should be the party to impugned order. Since, it is found that the order has been signed by the learned President on 07.03.2014 there lies anomalies. When both the parties are agreeing for removing such statutory error, we remit back the matter to the learned District Commission for hearing the argument of both the parties and pass order afresh in accordance with law. Hence, we hereby set-aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the learned District Commission, Cuttack to hear the learned counsel for the parties within 15 days from the date of this order and dispose of the case within 30 days from the date of hearing. It is made clear that none of the parties will lead evidence. Learned District Commission is informed to pass the order in accordance with law being not influenced by any observation made by learned District Forum in the impugned order which was set-aside but may pass order afresh basing on the materials produced before it.
Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned District Commission on 27.12.2022 to take further instruction.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No cost.
Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.
DFR be sent back forthwith.
