SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

S.B.MHASE, S.R.KHANZODE, NARENDRA KAWDE
Sameer Patil – Appellant
Versus
ICICI Lombard General Insurance – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant :Mr. Irfan Shaikh, Advocate.

ORDER (ORAL)

S. B. Mhase. President— Heard Advocate Irfan A. Shaikh for the Complainant. This matter was kept yesterday i.e. 16/Nov/2011 for hearing on admission. Since the point of limitation was raised by the State Commission in view of provisions of Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (‘the Act’ for brevity), the Learned Counsel for the Complainant sought time and has per his request the matter is placed today for admission. Heard.

2. Section 24A of the Act mandates the Consumer Fora shall not admit a consumer complaint unless it is filed within a period of two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen and, therefore, a duty has been cast upon the Consumer Fora at the time of hearing the complaint for admission to see as to whether the complaint is filed within the prescribed period of limitation as provided under the said Section and further to see if there is a delay, whether any application for condonation of the delay is made.

3. The facts involved in the present consumer complaint are as follows:

The Complainant has taken from the Opponent, namely ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Insurance Company’ for
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top