The court reinforced the principle of natural justice, ensuring every party has the right to be heard before a judgment is rendered.

(Per: Ms. Kumkum Rani, President):

This appeal has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 19.01.2017 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Dehradun (hereinafter to be referred as “The District Commission”) in consumer complaint No. 432 of 2013, styled as Smt. Shobha Devi Ramola Vs. United India Insurance Company Limited and another, wherein and whereby the consumer complaint was allowed ex-parte, directing the appellant / opposite party No. 1 to pay an amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- to respondent No. 1 / complainant towards claim amount together with Rs. 25,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation expenses, within a period of 30 days’, failing which the respondent No. 1 / complainant was further held entitled to interest @7% p.a. on the aforesaid sum from the date of judgment till realization.

2. The facts of the case, in brief, as stated in the consumer complaint, are that late Madan Chand Ramola, the deceased husband of respondent No. 1 / complainant – Smt. Shobha Devi Ramola, was the registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No. UP06-6317 (bus) and he had expired on 21.04.2012. Upon death of her husband, the complainant had got the documents of the vehicle transferred in her name on 15.05.2013. The aforesaid vehicle was insured with the appellant / opposite party No. 1 (insurance company) vide policy No. 2502023111P193891240 for the period from 29.03.2012 to 27.07.2013 at an IDV of Rs. 2,50,000/-. Upon asking of respondent No. 2 / opposite party No. 2, the complainant had surrendered the insurance policy and other documents along with death certificate of her husband, in the office of the insurance company on 27.11.2012. Upon transfer of ownership documents of the vehicle in her favour, the complainant had submitted an application dated 16.05.2013 with the insurance company for transfer of insurance policy in her name, whereupon she was assured that the insurance policy would be transferred in her name at the earliest, but the insurance company extended the insurance in the name of complainant’s husband till

27.07.2013. Inspite of repeated requests, the insurance policy was not transferred in complainant’s name. It was stated that on 16.06.2013, the insured bus was standing in Sonprayag parking and on account of heavy rains and landslide, the insured bus along with other vehicles got swept away in Mandakini River, intimation whereof was received by the complainant on 21.06.2013. The information of the occurrence was given by the complainant to Chowki Incharge, Guptkashi on 22.06.2013 and the insurance company was also informed about the occurrence. The complainant submitted the claim form on 08.07.2013, but the insurance company wrongly repudiated the claim vide letter dated 12.09.2013. Therefore, the consumer complaint was filed by the complainant before the District Commission.

3. The District Commission issued notice to the appellant and respondent No. 2, who were opposite parties to the consumer complaint, but they did not turn up before the District Commission and consequently, the District Commission vide order dated 08.07.2014 proceeded the consumer complaint ex-parte against them and allowed the consumer complaint vide impugned judgment and order dated 19.01.2017 in the above terms. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order, the appellant – insurance company has preferred the instant appeal.

4. We have heard arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. Vide order dated 20.01.2025, it was directed that the appeal shall proceed ex-parte ag