T .-& ^) ./1. ^^i IN IH2 HIGH COURT OH JUDICSWBE AT BIIASPUB (CG) WRIT PE'CT'nQH N0. -4-012- O? 2003 BETWEEH Snt. ?ran KaurwS/o Late 3iri Mahendra Singh, aged about 60 years, rssidffit of .Durpa, K>rba, Tehsll and Bigtrict Rsrba (CG). 1. EETITTCHER A N B The New'Cadia Assurance CDmpgny Liniited, Reglstered & Head Office New B?<3ia Assurapce Bullding, 87. Metiatiaa Gandhi Baad. por Murabai 4.00 001 (Haharashtra). B, 2. •Bie Dl.vi sional Mgnae^r, the New Iridia Assuranee company Limi-fced, Kbrba Divisional Of-eice, Sada Ooraplex, Transport Nagar, %>rba CCG). a: KESPeKBENTS WRII ISTITION TJNEER ARIICLES 226/227 OF_THE eOHS'EIIOTION O? IHIBB U«i,i, .^Ktt HIGHCOUKTOE€HHA'mSO^RHATBILASPUR PETmONER RESPONDB'TTS WMTPETmONNo. 4012 of2003 ^ -'' ', ' • : '• . . . ' - -• : Smt. PrMriKaur. ; VERSUS:: . : The New India Assurance CCTi^tuiy LmHted & MioBifir. WRTT PETTFIQN UNDER .ARnC<I^22&227 QF THE CC(NSTTTUTION QP INIMA SBilIon'MeSI^SatisliK.Aenflwfti.J. Present: Smt. RemiKochat,A(^cate^ ShriSourat>hSharnM,.AdVocatefbrtiierespQndents. ORDERYQRAD (Passed oali6al<layof August, 2010) 1. By this petition, the petiticaer seeks a •vmt to yash the lettCT dated 12.08.^03 (AimexureP/l)v>terebyi}iedaimof1l»petiti^^ rejected by the respondetit-Compaay.and furflia', to issue awrit in the natiu^ cfmandaimis commanding Ae resp<aident N6.2 to transfer Ihe insuranee poUcy m favour ofthe petidoner ahd aflowthe claim^^^^rf petitioner..: •: : :: .: ' :.:''.-;," ' ; ., 2. At the very outset, Slm Shamia, lean^^epBnsefcaCT®anW respondente subnrits tfiat this^ pe^ petitioner has not availed 1he altaaative aad etBcacious reme<fy, available to him under the provisions of section 12 of the pf the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 whereia tfae petitioner can nmlce a complaint before the District Conwmer Fwum, dialleHging the ilnpugned letter(AnnexureP?l). ' 3. On perusal of seetion 12 oflfae Aet, 1986, it is evidetit-that ifthe petTtioner is aggriewd by auy af the action ®fthe respondeBte, th® ^ petitiQnermaytiiAeac<Mnplaffltb^»Te1}ieDistri<rtCoiisu)^ ^Ri', "U.J^lan^ln^hith cumplamtshaUJteJnade.—(^A CQiq)lamt^m rdfatka to; ai^goods s^ QF?^ agT^dto1)ss6k}^or^slreered~OT'my^sen?i }mmfedor agreed to be provided may be filed with a Districf Eorum by— ' ' • Ca) the consumer to wfaom such goodsare sold or delivered or.ag^eed to be sold or 3eliYered or such service {M-ovided orag-eed fo be (a'ovided; any recognised consumer assoaation^vAether the consumOTifo wfcoin the gpods sold or deKvered or asreed to be sold or-deUvered or service proyi3ed <»•agreed to be provided is a manlier of sueh association or not; (c) one or more consumCTS, vrfiere there are numerouscpngMnCTshaymgtiie sanie inta'Mt,with ;| fhe^pennissiotipfAe Bistrict FOTiun,^w bd^f of, or for tfie benefit of, all consumers so uteresteS; or the Central Govemment or tiie State oyanment, as fhe case may be, either in its tndividual_capacityoras a' represent^ive of interests ofdie consumera irigenerd. (2) Every CMCplairt filed imdersub-sectton (1) shall be accQriyaniefl wifli sucU amount of fee and payAle in suchmannerasmaybepTescribed. complaiat made under sub-seetion (1), the Distnct FOTummay, 6y order, allow tite conytmnt Provided that a complamt sfaall noifc rejeeted uirier this sub-sectimi unless^ an'opportunity of beii^ heard has been givento theconiplainaid:' , ~ Provided fiuilfaer^ fhat flie^'adnussihility ofthe (xanplamt shaH ordinanly be decided wiflun twentx-one days fromthe date on which the cmiqilaiat wasreeeive3. '••_ (4) Wha^ »ccanplamt is allpwed to be pToceeded witii under sub-sectidn (3), the ©istnctForum m^proceed with the complairit mthe manrier provided under ffiis Act: ProvidedthatwhereacCTnplaBtfhasbeenadnutted by theDistnct Forum, it shall nptbe iTansfared to any ioflier court or tnbimal w any airthqrity set up by ar unda- any other law forthetime beiag m force. ExpJaiatiw.— Tor fhe purposes of Ifais seetion, "recogniAd consuiner aMoeiation'' meaiis any vplunter eMmBner assoaa&m tegistCTed under '&s Gxapsmes As. 1956 _(1 of 1956) or any olfaar law for the tune beiag iri force.]^' 4. This Court, m Maa Sharda SeMsari Upbhakta Bhandar Maryadit, Pratappur v. State cfChhatttsgwfi & Other^, reiymg onfhe ratiolaid down tylfae Supreme Court in State ofHJ>. and others v.-sGiyarat Ambuja Cement and cawthe^, U.PState Spin ng:"€o.*i[a{ds v. ' 't'•I'i {; I1 12008 (3).CGLJ 482 -2(20p5)6SCC499 '*- '''s;^ 'v^f ''^:<;.».2W3^ .Kas Aiaat (<h 5. R.SJ}andey an3 cmothe^ asd Secy. UJ>. High School & Intermediate Education.Alkihabcid&anotherv.H.KJ^af, DheimpwSugarMills^&tci. v. State of Uf anddthers^, M.P.State Agro fndustries Devekymeht Corporation & Anr. v Jahan Khan smd fopcom-Entertaimnattsend another v. City jn^struil Developmmt Ccvpn. <mii~,wioth ^^ Platinum Entertamment aivtwtother v. City Industrial Develc^nent Corpn. cmd anaffier7 held fhat normaUy, fhe High. Gourt A0ald,a®t! interfere if there is an adequate efficaeious alteriKtffie r^iedys^we hierarehy ofappeals isprovided bytfae statute, pMty^t^ s^tutory r^edy befwe respr^g to w^ jiuisdjction, except wlien a verystrongcaseismadeoutfiM-makMigadeparture. ; Inview oftfae foregouig,^spetitiari i&dismis^asnot^ However, Uberty is reserved tosflfe_petitionertotafcerecouise'l^ altemativestatutory forum, that may be avulable to har, un<l% the ^rovisions oflaw, ifso advi^d. No Qfderasto cpsts. j SdA Satish^K. Agmhotn r~ Judge n- li ii 3 (2005) 8 SGC 264 '1(2007)2SCG216 3 (2007) 8 SCC 338 'AIR2007 SC 3153 7(2007)9SC£:5(>3;: