STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
A BANDYOPADHYAY, PRESIDING MEMBER
HALIM SEKH – Appellant
Versus
MANAGER, MAGMA HDI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD – Respondent
FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/CB1/19/A/3/2023
ORDER
HON’BLE A BANDYOPADHYAY, PRESIDING MEMBER Order No. : 19 The factual matrix of the appeal is that being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 12.12.2022 passed by the ld. DCDRC Suri, Birbhum for wrongful repudiation of submitted claims which the appellant as a complainant is legally entitled for but the Commission below without considering the factual aspects passed the order in CC 26/2019. The said CC/26/2019 reveals that there was an issue of fact on 02.10.2018 at 6.30 am the JCB 3DX 2WD loader having Registration No. JH 16B/8693 belonging to the Complainant of CC 26/2019 namely, Halim Sekh who had purchased the said JCB with the financial assistance of the Magma Fincorp and kept it hypothecated with the Magma Fincorp Ltd. and got that JCB covered by the insurance policy of the Magma HDI General Insurance Company Ltd., the Complainant of the aforesaid complaint case and being the owner of the said JCB had filed CC 26/2019 against Magma HDI General Insurance Company Ltd. on the ground of its repudiating the claim of the Complainant in respect of his purchased insurance policy for his own JCB vide repudiation dated 29.12.2019 and communicated to Halim Sekh i.e., the Complainant of CC 26/2019 on 05.01.2019.
It appears from the case record of CC 26/2019 that Vide Order No. 26 passed on 12.12.2022, the Ld. DCDRC, Suri, Birbhum dismissed the said complaint case for default since on that date the Complainant, viz., Halim Sekh of the said complaint case had not filed show cause from his end though it was directed by the concerned Ld. Commission Birbhum in connection with the aforesaid complaint case and instead of filing show cause, prayed for an adjournment by filing a petition that was subsequently not pressed or moved, on being repeatedly calls during the hearing of CC/26/2019 before the concerned Commission, resulting in rejection of the prayer of the adjournment petition of the Complainant.
The case record reveals that against that Order No. 26 dated 12.12.2022, the complainant of the CC 26/2019 namely, Halim Sekh preferred an appeal before this Commission being No. 3 dated 20.01.2023 on following required procedures needed for filing appeal against the Order No. 26 passed by the Ld. DCDRC Suri, Birbhum.
It further transpires from the available materials-on-record that during the Court proceeding of appeal before this Commission the Appellant namely, Halim Sekh filed a petition praying for condonation of delay for preferring the said appeal on 20.01.2023 against the Order No. 26 dated 12.12.2022 passed in CC/26/2019 by the Ld. DCDRC Suri, Birbhum and the same delay petition was allowed by this Commission.
The Ops of CC/26/2019 - Respondents after due service of notice appeared before this Commission and stated that the conduct of the Complainant in the District Commission below is absolutely not condonable and even after getting repeated opportunities had failed to appear before the Commission and the Ld. Commission below had correctly passed the dismissal order in the Complaint Case No. 26/2019.
Issue to be determined :
Whether the findings of the District Commission passed in CC/26/2019 dated 12.12.2022 deserves interference or not.
The records from the District Commission were called for and perused. On going through the order of the District Commission it could be seen that on 12.12.2022 the Complainant filed a prayer for time though there was order for filing show cause by the Complainant but none appeared on behalf of the Complainant and none moves on repeated calls on his behalf and the Ld.
DCDRC was pleased to reject the prayer of the Complainant and dismissed the case for default.
It is against this order, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant on the following grounds (i) For that the order of the Ld. Commission below passed on 12.12.2022 is error apparent as well as not maintainable in law as well as in fact (ii) For that the order of Ld. Commission which had been passed without considering the bona
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.