VIKAS SANITARY AND HARDWARE STORE Vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
LAWS(HRCDRC)-2013-10-1
HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on October 31,2013

Vikas Sanitary And Hardware Store Appellant
VERSUS
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

K.S.CHAUDHARI,PRESIDING MEMBER - (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 24.09.2012 passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short the State Commission) in FA No. 420/2011, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. versus M/s. Vikas Sanitary & Hardware Store & Anr.  by which while allowing the appeal, order of District Forum allowing the complaint was modified and compensation was reduced.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that complainant - petitioner got his shop insured from opposite party No. 1 / respondent no. 1 from 24.03.2006 to 23.03.2007 for coverage of risk of fire, theft etc. Complainant had obtained cc limit from opposite party no. 2 / respondent no. 2 for running his business. In the intervening night of 29/30.09.2006 fire broke -out in the shop. A report was lodged with the Police and intimation was given to opposite party no. 1. Opposite Party No. 1 was given legal notice, thereafter, opposite party No. 1 sent a cheque of 1,36,547/ - to opposite party No. 2 which was credited in the account of complainant. As amount sent was too less in comparison to loss of 5,22,000/ -, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant filed complaint before the District Forum. Opposite parties resisted claim and submitted that as per assessment made by surveyor, cheque was sent and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties allowed the complaint and directed opposite party No. 1 to pay 2,84,932.19ps. along with interest @12% p.a. and further ordered to pay 5,000/ - as litigation expenses. Appeal filed by opposite party no. 1 was partly allowed by learned State Commission. It was held that complainant is not entitled to any relief except 1,36,547/ -, against which this revision petition has been filed.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused the record. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that impugned order is a non -speaking order, hence revision petition be allowed and matter may be remanded back to learned State Commission. Learned counsel for respondent also agreed to this extent that the impugned order is a non -speaking order.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.