At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN
By, PRESIDING MEMBER
For the Petitioner: Kishore Rawat with Mayank Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondent: Vikash Singh, Advocate.
V.K. Jain, Presiding Member (Oral)
1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the State Commission dated 31-03-2014 whereby the said Commission dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of the District Forum dated 06-01-2010 in Complaint No.245 of 2010.
2. The main grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the State Commission has not dealt with any of the submissions of the insurance company on merits. He submits that while considering the first appeal, the State Commission was required to independently examine the material on record and render its own finding on the issues involved in the complaint. On a perusal of the impugned order I find that it does not even indicate as to what were the contentions of the appellant/petitioner before the State Commission. It does not refer to any of the grounds on which the order of the District Forum was assailed by the insurance company. The impugned order dated 31-03-2014 passed by the State Commission, therefore, cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set aside. The State Commission is directed to decide the appeal afresh after dealing with the submissions made on behalf of the insurance company. A fresh order in terms of these directions shall be passed by the State Commission within three months of the parties appearing before the State Commission. The parties are d
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
irected to appear before the State Commission on 15-10-2014. 3. The revision petition along with the accompanying application is disposed of.