M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

                                  FIRST APPEAL NO. 1741 OF 2019

(Arising out of order dated 20.06.2019 passed in C.C.No.46/2017 by District Commission, Narsinghpur)

LATE MEERA BAI THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS

KAMAL SINGH JATAV & ORS.                                                                        …          APPELLANTS

Versus

RELIGARE HEALTH INSURANCE CO.LTD. & ANR.                                       …         RESPONDENTS.

BEFORE:

                  HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHANTANU S. KEMKAR     :      PRESIDENT

                  HON’BLE SHRI S. S. BANSAL                                      :      MEMBER  

                                      O R D E R

06.12.2021

          None for the appellants.

            Shri Anand Shahani, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.

            None for the respondent no.2.

As per Shri Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar :                       

This appeal arises out of order dated 20.06.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Narsinghpur (for short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.46/2017.    

2.                     Perused the impugned order as also the interim order dated 09.03.2021 by which preliminary objections raised by respondent no.1 was decided. Following is the decision on preliminary objections:

                        09.03.2021         Shri Manish Nema, learned counsel for the appellants.

                                                         Shri Anand Shahani, learned counsel for the respondent.

                                We have heard learned counsel for parties on preliminary objections raised by learned counsel for the respondent that this appeal has been filed by the LRs of the deceased Meera Bai who had expired before passing of the impugned order.

                                Replying to the aforesaid objection, learned counsel for appellant pointed out that an application seeking amendment in the complaint so as to bring LRs of deceased complainant Meera Bai was filed as back as on 08.09.2017.  The said application was allowed on 08.09.2017.  The amendment was also incorporated on 14.09.2017.  However, in the impugned order, old title was mentioned.

                                We have considered the rival contentions and have gone through the record.  We find that application so as to bring LRs of deceased complainant Meera Bai on record was allowed

-2-

and the amendment was also incorporated in the complaint.  In such circumstances, the District Commission was duty bound to have passed order mentioning the amended cause title of the complaint.  Having not done so, the appellants moved an application for correction in the impugned order so as to in conformity of amendment in the complaint but the said application was rejected by the District Commission.

                                Having regard to the aforesaid, in our considered view the memo of appeal filed by the appellants cannot be said to be defective and the submission of learned counsel for respondent that this appeal has wrongly been filed by the LRs of the deceased complainant is misconceived. Therefore, the preliminary objection is rejected.

3.                     The aforesaid order dated 09.03.2021 in fact decides the grievance raised in this appeal itself as the appeal was against the order dated 20.06.2019 by which the application submitted by the complainant to bring Legal Heirs of Meera Bai on record which has already been allowed to incorporate in the impugned order, was rejected.

4.                     The interim order dated 09.03.2021 has taken care of the relief claimed by the appellant. The said order is made absolute.

5.                     With the aforesaid observation, this appeal is disposed of as allowed.

                (Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar)              (S. S. Bansal) 

                                Pre