At, Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
By, SRI SYED ABDULLAH
By, HONBLE MEMBER & SRI R. LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO
By, HONBLE MEMBER
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. R. Nageswara Reddy. Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. K.S. N. Murthy
Oral order : ( as per Sri Syed Abdullah, Hon?ble Member )
This appeal is filed against the order dated 15.6.2009 in CC 164/2009 passed by the DCF III, Hyderabad, where under, the complaint filed against the respondent/ Insurance com
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
any was dismissed for default of the complainant. The facts of the case disclose that the complainant?s husband had taken personal accident policy from the respondent/insurance company and that her husband while driving on the road met with an accident and died on 30.11.2007, thereby the complainant filed insurance claim but there was no response at all . So she filed the complaint to adjudicate the matter under the provisions of C P. Act.The respondent/OP after receiving notice from the District Forum had appeared through its advocate but not filed any counter. So the complainant was directed to file her affidavit evidence to prove the claim. As the complainant failed to attend continuously for 3 to 4 adjournments, the complaint was dismissed for default.Point for consideration is whether the impugned order is liable to be set aside ?Heard the counsel for the appellant and the respondent. Ex facie the complaint was dismissed for default and it was not disposed of on merits. As there is no provision in C. P. Act permitting the District Forum for restoration of the complaint either dismissed for default or decreed exparte, the aggrieved party is necessarily has to file the appeal before the State Commission and accordingly the appeal was filed. By virtue of Sec. 15 of C P Act, the State Commission is vested with right to interfere with the orders of the District Forum. Obviously, the appellant/ Complaint had no opportunity to prove her claim. Apart from that the impugned order was not passed on merits. The principles of natural justice require that a party should be heard by giving an opportunity. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this appeal is allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 15.6.2009 passed in CC 164/2009 by the District Forum III, Hyderabad with a direction to restore the complaint to the file giving an opportunity to both sides and dispose of it on merits. Both the appellant and respondents are directed to appear before the District Forum III, Hyderabad on 15.2.2010 without insisting for any fresh notice from the District Forum. No costs.