CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and Commissions

National Insurance Co.Ltd vs M.M.LAL

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 30 December 1994 · Citation: 1995 3 CPJ 290

HON’BLE JUDGES
R.N.Mittal , S.Brar J.
RESULT
Appeal dismissed
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 349 words
1.

THIS appeal has been filed by the opposite party (O.P.) against the order of District Forum No. II (D.F.) dated 9.3.94 by which the claim of the complainant was allowed.

2.

BRIEFLY, the facts are that the complainant purchased a House Holder Insurance Policy from the O.P. which included policy for repair of the electrical goods. It is pleaded by the complainant that his refrigerator went out of the order and he got the same repaired by spending Rs. 8,000/-, for which the goods were insured. The O.P. allowed Rs. 1,920/- which was not .acceptable to him. Consequently, he filed a complaint before the District Forum. The opposite party after appearing on some hearings did not appear. Consequently, they were proceeded against ex-parte. The District Forum accepted the complaint and directed the O.P. to pay Rs. 8,000/- to the complainant with interest @15% p.a. from 1.7.91 to the date of payment. The O.P. has come up in appeal against the said order to the Commission.

The learned Counsel for the appellant has argued that the dispute had been referred to the Arbitrator by the parties but the complainant withdrew from the arbitration and filed the complaint before the District Forum. Therefore, the dispute could not be decided by the District Forum. We have considered the argument. The question raised by the learned Counsel is one of fact. It is well settled that a disputed question of fact, cannot be determined in appeal, unless it was raised before the Trial Court. As already mentioned the O.P. was proceeded against ex-parte by the D.F. and that no written statement was filed by them. In this situation it is not possible for the State Commission to adjudicate upon this dispute. The O.P. may file an application for setting aside ex-parte order before District Forum which will be considered and decided by it.

3.

FOR the aforesaid reasons we dismiss the appeal subject to the observations that the appellant may file an application for setting aside the ex-parte order before District FORum, if so advised. No order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.