NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Through its AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE – Appellant
Versus
CHHABILAL HANDRA S/o. RAMKUMAR CHANDRA – Respondent
NC/SA/845/2025
##PAGE1##
IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
SECOND APPEAL NO. 845 OF 2025
(Against the Order dated 28/06/2024 in FA No. 117 of 2024 of the State Commission,
Chhattisgarh)
WITH
IA/15017/2025(for grant of stay) IA/15018/2025 (Condonation of delay compliance of
order) & IA/15019/2025 (Exemption from dim documents)
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Appellant
Versus
Chhabilal Handra ....Respondent
BEFORE:
HON’BLE AVM J. RAJENDRA, AVSM VSM (RETD.), PRESIDING MEMBER
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, MEMBER
For Appellant : Appearance not marked
Datedj 23-12-2025
ORDER
1. As per the record of the Registry, there is a delay of 427 days in
filing this Second Appeal. Accordingly IA/15018/2025 has been filed by
the Appellant seeking Condonation of delay.
2. In the said Application, the learned counsel for the Appellant has
stated following grounds for the delay in filing of the instant Appeal:
That the impugned order dated 28.06.2024 was not
communicated to the Appellant by the panel Advocate
engaged before the State Commission. The Appellant was
repeatedly assured that the First Appeal was pending
adjudication, and relying upon such representations, did not
make independent enquiries.
4. That in the first quarter of 2025, the said Advocate began
evading communication and continued to maintain that the
appeal was pending. It was only in May 2025-after nearly
eleven months-that the Appellant was informed of the
dismissal of the First Appeal on 28.06.2024. The Advocate
##PAGE2##further disclosed that the certified copy of the order had been
misplaced by his office.
5 That upon receiving this information, the Appellant
immediately sought legal advice from another counsel, who
was engaged to obtain the certified copy of the impugned
order. The application for certified copy was filed on
05.06.2025 and the copy was supplied on 10.06.2025. Acting
on further legal advice, the Appellant filed a Writ Petition
before the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur on
18.06.2025.
6. That the Writ Petition was withdrawn on 11.07.2025 with
liberty to pursue appropriate remedies under law. The Hon'ble
High Court was pleased to permit withdrawal. Thereafter, the
Appellant sought fresh legal opinion and internal approval
from the competent authority, which occasioned further delay
in filing the present Second Appeal.
7. That the Appellant was bona fide prosecuting the matter
before the Hon'ble High Court under mistaken legal advice.
The subject matter of the Writ Petition and the present Second
Appeal is identical, and the Appellant was diligently pursuing
the remedy in good faith. The delay is neither wilful nor due to
negligence but attributable to circumstances beyond the
Appellant's control, including non-cooperation by the earlier
Advocate and incorrect legal guidance.
8. That the Appellant seeks exclusion of time spent in
prosecuting the Writ Petition under Section 14 of the
Limitation Act, 1963, which permits exclusion of time spent in
proceedings bona fide pursued in a forum without
jurisdiction. The Appellant further seeks condonation of delay
under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, which empowers this
Hon'ble Commission to condone delay upon sufficient cause
being shown.
9. That the Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that
a liberal and justice-oriented approach must be adopted in
condoning delay. Reliance is placed on the following
decisions:
• Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji, (1987) 2 SCC 107
• N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy, (1998) 7 SCC 123
• Consolidated Engineering v. Principal Secretary, (2008) 7
SCC 169
##PAGE3##10. The Appellants therefore submits that the Second Appeal
may kindly be admitted on condoning the delay.
3. In the First Appeal, the State Commission passed the Impugned
Order on 28.06.2024. The limitation for filing the Second Appeal before
this Commission is 30 days. However, the same would commence from
the date of receipt of the Order by the Appellant i.e. 28.06.2024, while
the limitation lapsed on 27.07.2024, the present
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.