PUNE, April 26: The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has dismissed a complaint filed by Ranka Jewellers against National Insurance Company, Calcutta, and the National Insurance Company Ltd. Ranka Jewellers had claimed Rs 2,99,000 towards the price of 45 bangles weighing 623.03 gm, Rs 1 lakh towards interest and Rs 15,000 towards other expenses leading to a total cost of Rs 4,15,660, alleging deficiency in service.According to the case brief, on August 15, 1996 due to a large rush of customers since morning to 8 p.m. The complainant Anil Ranka noticed the disappearance of the bangles during stock taking. He filed an FIR and submitted his claim form. It was pointed out that as per exclusion clause no 2 of the Jewellers' Block Policy any loss discovered at the time of stock taking is not covered under the Jewellers' Block Policy unless the insured proves that the loss was due to a peril like theft covered by the policy.The opponents submitted that it was physically difficult to lean over the counter and flick the bangle box and appealed for dismissal of the complaint.Forum president K R Pawar and members A S Kote and N V Pote felt that the complicated questions of fact required its adjudication at the hands of Civil Court and in the peculiar circumstances the complaint could not be entertained by the forum.In another decision, the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra State, has upheld the judgement delivered by Pune District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on a complaint made by renowned Marathi film actor Suryakant Mandhare against Bafna Construction alleging deficiency in service. An appeal filed by Bafna Constructions in the State Commission has been dismissed.According to the complaint filed by Mandhare, after he decided to make Pune his home, he made an application to the Government for a flat from the Government quota which was granted by the Chief Minister. The flat was allotted to him from a housing construction scheme of Bafna opposite Koregaon Park. As per the agreement, a flat of 80.35 sq mt was to be sold to the complainant by the builder from the Government quota for which a consideration amount was fixed at Rs 1,81,125.Mandhare claimed that he had paid a total amount of Rs 1,90,920 to Bafna along with an additional Rs 1,05,318 for additional facilities. After receiving possession, Mandhare realised that the additional amenities had not been effected. When the builder refused to listen to his complaint and started threatening him, Mandhare was forced to approach the consumer forum.The District Forum judgement was delivered in Mandhare's favour by president K D Kochargaonkar and members S S Pendse and S S Oak asking Bafana Constructions to pay Rs 1,05,318 along with interest and compensation to him. It was appealed against by the builder.The State Commission considered the fact that the builder did not appear in the District Forum despite being served with a notice. It also noticed that the builder had not tendered any evidence regarding the short payment made by the complainant. The appeal was dismissed by president A A Halbe and member Rajyalakshmi Rao.
