ORAL

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                         UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW                         

                              APPEAL NO.  1384 OF 2019

              (Against the order dated 17-10-2018 in Complaint Case

               No.148/2012 of the District Consumer Commission, Muzaffarnagar)

Smt. Poonam Sharma

W/o Sri Krishna Kumar Sharma

R/o House No. 523/36

Mohalla Laddhavala

Muzaffarnagar, U. P.

                                                                    ...Appellant/Complainant

                                                     Vs.

National Insurance Company Limited

Through Divisional Manager

Through Divisional Office

Arya Samaj Road, Near D.A.V.

Muzaffarnagar  

                                                                     ...Respondent/Opposite Party

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTER HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

HON’BLE MR. SUSHIL KUMAR, MEMBER

For the Appellant       :   Km. Tara Gupta, Advocate.

For the Respondent    :                 

Dated : 15-12-2020

                                            ORDER

MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT

This is an appeal filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against order dated 17-10-2018 passed by District Consumer Commission, Muzaffarnagar in Complaint Case No.148/2012 Smt. Poonam Sharma V/s National Insurance Company Limited whereby the District Consumer Commission has dismissed complaint in default of complainant as not pressed. 

Learned Counsel Km. Tara Gupta appeared for appellant.

None appeared for respondent despite sufficient service of notice.

We have heard learned Counsel for the appellant and perused memo of appeal as well as impugned order.

It is contended by learned Counsel for the appellant/complainant that appellant/complainant has not given any instruction to her Counsel in District Consumer Commission to not press the complaint. The complaint has been dismissed in default of complainant.

It is contended by learned Counsel for the appellant that the learned

:2:

Counsel in District Consumer Commission has assured complainant that she shall see the case in her absence. Therefore, the complainant did not appear before District Consumer Commission on the date fixed.

We have considered the submission made by learned Counsel for the appellant.

Perusal of impugned order shows that it has been passed in absence of complainant but in presence of her Counsel. Perusal of impugned order further shows that learned Counsel for the complainant informed District Consumer Commission that she has no contact with the complainant since long, therefore, she is not pressing this complaint.

In view of above it cannot be said that the Counsel has not pressed complaint on the instruction of complainant. We are of the view that the complaint has been dismissed in absence of complainant vide impugned order and appellant/complainant has shown sufficient reason for her absence on date fixed before District Consumer Commission.

In view of above, the appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 17-10-2018 passed by District Consumer Commission, Muzaffarnagar in Complaint Case No. 148 of 2012 Smt. Poonam Sharma V/s National Insurance Company Limited is set aside on payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- and the complaint is remanded back to the District Consumer Commis