Deciding Time-Barred Consumer Complaints Is Illegal, Uttarakhand State Commission Sets Aside Order Against Shriram General Insurance Co.

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand bench of Ms Kumkum Rani (President) and Mr B.S. Manral (Member) held that deciding a time-barred complaint on merits would be illegal and consumer fora must assess the limitation period before admitting the complaint. The order of the Haridwar District Commission was set aside for deciding a time-barred complaint on merits. Brief Facts: The deceased was the registered owner of a three-wheeler model Kranti Auto-Nandi Super 400-D. This vehicle was the sole source of his livelihood and his family. The vehicle was insured with Shriram General Insurance Company Limited (“Insurance Company”), with an Insured Declared Value (IDV) of Rs. 1,00,000/-. The policy covered accidental damage, theft, and other motor claims, along with a Personal Accident (P.A.) Cover for the deceased amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/- in the event of death. On 09.12.2015, while he was going to work in the insured vehicle, it collided with a bus around 7:30 a.m., resulting in his instant death. Subsequently, his wife (“Complainant”) submitted a claim to the Insurance Company, which was not settled. The Complainant then sent a legal notice to the Insurance Company via email on 24.07.2020, seeking the status and settlement of the claim, but received no response. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haridwar, Uttarakhand (“District Commission”). The Insurance Company contended that the Complainant had not lodged any claim for disbursement of the insurance amount. It claimed that it became aware of the deceased's death only upon receiving the summons for the consumer complaint. Due to the unreported claim, the Insurance Company argued that it had no opportunity to process it, hence no deficiency in service could be attributed to it. Additionally, it argued that the consumer complaint, filed four years after the deceased's death, was barred by the two-year limitation period specified in the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The Complainant had not applied for condonation of delay, making the complaint liable for dismissal. The District Commission allowed the complaint and directed the Insurance Company to disburse Rs. 2 Lakh and pay Rs. 25,000/- as legal costs and Rs. 15,000/- as compensation to the Complainant. Aggrieved by this decision, the Insurance Company filed an appeal before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarakhand (“State Commission”). Observations of the Commission: The State Commission observed that the complaint did not specify whether immediate intimation of the deceased's death was given to the Insurance Company. The Complainant merely alleged that the complaint was filed within the limitation period, without explaining how it was timely. It was further noted that the accident occurred on 09.12.2015, and the consumer complaint was filed on 20.08.2020, without any application for condonation of delay. Given the specific limitation provisions under the Consumer Protection Act, of 2019, the State Commission held that the complaint was time-barred and should have been dismissed by the District Commission. The State Commission concluded that the District Commission passed its judgment and order without proper application of mind, ignoring the provisions of the Act and relevant laws. The District Commission's decision was deemed unjustified, and it was found to have acted with material illegality and infirmity. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the order of the District Commission was set aside. Case Title: Shriram General Insurance Company Limited and Anr. vs Smt. Umesh Case No.: First Appeal No. 113/2022 Advocate for the Appellants (Insurance Company): Shri Deepak Ahluwalia Advocate for the Original Complainant/Respondent: None Date of Order: 15.07.2024Click Here To Read/Download Order

Deciding Time-Barred Consumer Complaints Is Illegal, Uttarakhand State Commission Sets Aside Order Against Shriram General Insurance Co.

Smita Singh

Tags