Maharashtra

Additional DCF, Nagpur

RBT/CC/614/2019

SAU. SHWETA ANAND MESHRAM - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE - Opp.Party(s)

ADV. SHRI. P.B. THAWARE

23 May 2023

ORDER

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
NAGPUR
New Administrative Building No.-1
3rd Floor, Civil Lines, Nagpur-440001
Ph.0712-2546884
 
Complaint Case No. RBT/CC/614/2019
 
1. SAU. SHWETA ANAND MESHRAM
R/O. 94, MESHRAM LAYOUT, SUMEDH NAGAR, NARA ROAD, NAGPUR
NAGPUR
MAHARASHTRA
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE
1ST FLOOR, AYODHYA BUILDING, 119, NEAR BAJAJ NAGAR CHOWK, BEHIND AKRUTI FURNITURE, NAGPUR
NAGPUR
MAHARASHTRA
2. THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE
H BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, DHIRUBHAI TAMBANI KNOWLEDGE CITY, NEW MUMBAI-400710
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
3. BRANCH MANGER, CORPORATE OFFICE
RELIANCE CENTER SOUTH, WING 4 FLOOR, WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY, SENTAKRUJ, EAST MUMBAI-400055
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MS. SMITA N. CHANDEKAR PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. AVINASH V. PRABHUNE MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 23 May 2023
Final Order / Judgement

Shri Avinash V. Prabhune, Member

 

1        It is matter of records that Complaint was filed on 19.10.2019 & admitted on 13.08.2021 & Notices was issued to O.P. Complainant & his counsel were continuously absent since 22.09.2021 & did not take any steps to serve Notice to O.P.

 

2.       Complainant was directed to appear before Commission on 03.04.2023 vide letter dtd. 20.02.2023 issued by this Commission. The said letter was delivered to Complainant on 01.03.2023 as per tracking report available on records. Complainant & her counsel did not take any step to serve Notice to OP thereafter & remained continuously absent on all subsequent dates i.e. on 03.04.2023, 17.04.2023 & Today also on 23.05.2023.

 

3.       It is clearly evident from above records that ample opportunities have been given to Complainant during last four years to take steps & prosecute matter but Complainant had failed to take steps, therefore, it appears that Complainant has lost interest in the matter & does not want to prosecute the Complaint further.

 

4.       In view of the above facts & circumstances, Commission is of the firm opinion that present Consumer Complaint deserves to be dismissed for want of prosecution, hence dismissed.

 

 

ORDER,

1) Consumer Complaint is dismissed for want of prosecution.

2) No order as to Costs.

 

 

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MS. SMITA N. CHANDEKAR]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. AVINASH V. PRABHUNE]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.