THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
APPEAL NO.1216/2022
PRESENT
SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI, MEMBER
Sri.Bashatti,
S/o Chandrappa Boodanaoor,
Occ: Govt. Service,
R/at: Plat Oni, Tilavalli … Appellant/s
Village, Hanagal taluk,
District: Haveri
(By Sri.Ramachandra.N.Murnal, Advocate)
V/s
The Divisional Manager,
United India Insurance Co. Ltd,
Enkay Complex,
Keshwapur Hubballi, … Respondent/s
Dist: Dharwad
(By -Sri.B.C.Shivanne Gowda, Advocate)
O R D E R
BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The Appellant/Complainant in complaint No.13/2022 has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the District Consumer Commission, Haveri which dismissed the complaint as barred by time and submits that he had filed a complaint before the District Consumer Commission alleging deficiency in service in not settling the claim towards theft of his vehicle.
2. After filing a complaint, he filed an application under Section 5 Limitation Act to condone the delay of 362 days and sworn affidavit that since he was working as Village Accountant at Hirekerur, he was allotted Task Force Activity of COVID-2019 during 2021-22. Due to his continues Task Force Activity in attending the COVID-2019 situation he was not able to file appeal well within time. In fact, the government also declared restrictions to the public at large towards free access and free transportation. Hence, he was unable to file the complaint well within time, but the District Commission without considering the said facts had dismissed the complaint as barred by time. There is no intentional delay in filing the complaint. Hence, prays to set aside the order passed by the District Commission and remand back the matter for fresh trial, in the interest of justice and equity.
3. Heard on admission.
4. On perusal of the certified copy of the order, we noticed that, the District Commission has noted that there is delay of nearly 362 days, the complainant had filed an application to condone the said delay by sworing affidavit that he was engaged in Task Force Activity of Covid-2019 as assigned by Government of Karnataka. Furthermore we noticed during that time the Government of Karnataka also declared ban on publics to move one place to another and also access any places. Furthermore we noticed our Hon’ble National Commission and Hon’ble Supreme Court of India also extended a grace period of limitation to file a complaint or any other suits before court of law. Considering all these, the delay can be condoned, but the District Commission has failed to appreciate the direction given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and Hon’ble National Consumer Commission.
5. The complainant alleged deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party/Insurance Company for not settling the claim towards theft of his vehicle. Hence, the matter requires reconsideration; accordingly the order passed by the District Commission is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the District Commission to try on merits upon the evidence produced by both parties and dispose expeditiously as per the provision of Consumer Protection Act. Accordingly the appeal is allowed and we proceed to pass the following:-
O R D E R
The appeal is allowed. No order as to cost.
The impugned order dated 17-5-2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haveri in CC.No.13/2022 is set-aside.
The District Consumer Commission is directed to restore the matter in its original number and adjudicate the matter upon the appreciation of evidence and documents produced by both parties and dispose the matter expeditiously on merits
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as concerned District Consumer Commission.
Member Judicial Member
Jrk/-
